Judge Orders Christian to pay Homo for using “Inappropriate” Bible verse

[Preacher]

The homo set the Christian up, then they wonder why people are getting sick of their shit

Judge Orders Christian To Pay Homosexual For Using “Inappropriate” Bible Verse

Christian Concern reports that Michael Overd was unjustly ordered by District Judge Shamim Ahmed Qureshi to pay a homosexual “victim” compensation of nearly $1,800 for causing him “emotional pain.”

What was Overd’s crime? It all began when he was approached by the homosexual for a biblical debate to which Overd obliged, unknowingly walking right into a trap.

“My motivation for preaching the gospel is my love for Jesus Christ and my deep concern for people who do not know His great love and are heading towards an eternity separated from God,” Overd passionately expressed.

But Judge Qureshi didn’t see Overd’s quoting scripture as a good thing or legal right for that matter.

Judge Qureshi told Overd that he should not have referred to Leviticus chapter 20 in making his point, reasoning that the lengthy chapter mentions that the law of the land in those times was death for homosexuals. Instead, Qureshi said that he should have used Leviticus 18, which the judge thinks is a much more semantically kinder warning to homosexuals.

Judge Orders Christian To Pay Homosexual For Using Inappropriate Bible Verse

Should have known soon as I read it,it was somewhere that doesn't care for free speech. England is going down he toilet bowl of history. So much rich history and culture down the drain...

When has the UK EVER had free speech?

Hell if I know. Have they?

 

[bodecea]

The homo set the Christian up, then they wonder why people are getting sick of their shit

Judge Orders Christian To Pay Homosexual For Using “Inappropriate” Bible Verse

Christian Concern reports that Michael Overd was unjustly ordered by District Judge Shamim Ahmed Qureshi to pay a homosexual “victim” compensation of nearly $1,800 for causing him “emotional pain.”

What was Overd’s crime? It all began when he was approached by the homosexual for a biblical debate to which Overd obliged, unknowingly walking right into a trap.

“My motivation for preaching the gospel is my love for Jesus Christ and my deep concern for people who do not know His great love and are heading towards an eternity separated from God,” Overd passionately expressed.

But Judge Qureshi didn’t see Overd’s quoting scripture as a good thing or legal right for that matter.

Judge Qureshi told Overd that he should not have referred to Leviticus chapter 20 in making his point, reasoning that the lengthy chapter mentions that the law of the land in those times was death for homosexuals. Instead, Qureshi said that he should have used Leviticus 18, which the judge thinks is a much more semantically kinder warning to homosexuals.

Judge Orders Christian To Pay Homosexual For Using Inappropriate Bible Verse

Should have known soon as I read it,it was somewhere that doesn't care for free speech. England is going down he toilet bowl of history. So much rich history and culture down the drain...

When has the UK EVER had free speech?

Hell if I know. Have they?

If you don't know...why would you say that England (which is only part of the UK, btw) is going down the toilet bowl of history?

 

[Preacher]

The homo set the Christian up, then they wonder why people are getting sick of their shit

Judge Orders Christian To Pay Homosexual For Using “Inappropriate” Bible Verse

Christian Concern reports that Michael Overd was unjustly ordered by District Judge Shamim Ahmed Qureshi to pay a homosexual “victim” compensation of nearly $1,800 for causing him “emotional pain.”

What was Overd’s crime? It all began when he was approached by the homosexual for a biblical debate to which Overd obliged, unknowingly walking right into a trap.

“My motivation for preaching the gospel is my love for Jesus Christ and my deep concern for people who do not know His great love and are heading towards an eternity separated from God,” Overd passionately expressed.

But Judge Qureshi didn’t see Overd’s quoting scripture as a good thing or legal right for that matter.

Judge Qureshi told Overd that he should not have referred to Leviticus chapter 20 in making his point, reasoning that the lengthy chapter mentions that the law of the land in those times was death for homosexuals. Instead, Qureshi said that he should have used Leviticus 18, which the judge thinks is a much more semantically kinder warning to homosexuals.

Judge Orders Christian To Pay Homosexual For Using Inappropriate Bible Verse

Should have known soon as I read it,it was somewhere that doesn't care for free speech. England is going down he toilet bowl of history. So much rich history and culture down the drain...

When has the UK EVER had free speech?

Hell if I know. Have they?

If you don't know...why would you say that England (which is only part of the UK, btw) is going down the toilet bowl of history?

Its not only because they don't have free speech even if they had not had free speech they have criminalized speech that might hurt the feelings of some non white invader,faggot,female whatever...the country is drowning in a cesspool of politically correct shit.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Nope not at all, forgiveness perhaps, and not to judge. As far as Leviticus 20 goes God hates divorce and those that commit adultery should be put to death, not only gays but so as I said perhaps 100 million Americans most likely more then that should be put to death. You cannot claim just gay people if your going to quote that verse and anyone who divorces and marries again should be put to death because that is adultery, Like I said before, you guys pick and choose what to follow, and convienantly forget the sins you commit.

Besides the fact the New Testament trumps the Old Testament so unless your Jewish you really should not be quoting verses that is obsolete due to Jesus's sacrifice.

You missed the point altogether. Jesus is not a different God than the one that gave the law on Mt. Sinai, he is the same. That's your first mistake. The second is your assumption that the gospels are an exhaustive account of all Jesus taught. They aren't. In fact, the teachings of Christ are reflected in the teachings of his apostles and their immediate successors, most notably Paul and Jude who warned of the sin of homosexuality. The third mistake you make is the fallacy that disobeying some of God's laws renders the rest void. It doesn't. Such is the folly of trying to interpret the word of God without actually knowing God.

 

[TimothysAlaska]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Nope not at all, forgiveness perhaps, and not to judge. As far as Leviticus 20 goes God hates divorce and those that commit adultery should be put to death, not only gays but so as I said perhaps 100 million Americans most likely more then that should be put to death. You cannot claim just gay people if your going to quote that verse and anyone who divorces and marries again should be put to death because that is adultery, Like I said before, you guys pick and choose what to follow, and convienantly forget the sins you commit.

Besides the fact the New Testament trumps the Old Testament so unless your Jewish you really should not be quoting verses that is obsolete due to Jesus's sacrifice.

You missed the point altogether. Jesus is not a different God than the one that gave the law on Mt. Sinai, he is the same. That's your first mistake. The second is your assumption that the gospels are an exhaustive account of all Jesus taught. They aren't. In fact, the teachings of Christ are reflected in the teachings of his apostles and their immediate successors, most notably Paul and Jude who warned of the sin of homosexuality. The third mistake you make is the fallacy that disobeying some of God's laws renders the rest void. It doesn't. Such is the folly of trying to interpret the word of God without actually knowing God.

Ok them why are you not out in the street stoning people to death? I am not making any mistake! Apparently your either not a good christian or you interpret what you want from the scriptures and disregard the rest.

 

[TimothysAlaska]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Nope not at all, forgiveness perhaps, and not to judge. As far as Leviticus 20 goes God hates divorce and those that commit adultery should be put to death, not only gays but so as I said perhaps 100 million Americans most likely more then that should be put to death. You cannot claim just gay people if your going to quote that verse and anyone who divorces and marries again should be put to death because that is adultery, Like I said before, you guys pick and choose what to follow, and convienantly forget the sins you commit.

Besides the fact the New Testament trumps the Old Testament so unless your Jewish you really should not be quoting verses that is obsolete due to Jesus's sacrifice.

You missed the point altogether. Jesus is not a different God than the one that gave the law on Mt. Sinai, he is the same. That's your first mistake. The second is your assumption that the gospels are an exhaustive account of all Jesus taught. They aren't. In fact, the teachings of Christ are reflected in the teachings of his apostles and their immediate successors, most notably Paul and Jude who warned of the sin of homosexuality. The third mistake you make is the fallacy that disobeying some of God's laws renders the rest void. It doesn't. Such is the folly of trying to interpret the word of God without actually knowing God.

Look dude what I am saying is people have free will. Those that live their life and find their way to Christ is a powerful thing, let them make their own choices and they will come to Christ on their own accord, which is more powerful then just believing what you were told as a child. Forcing people to accept Christ before they are ready does injustice to their life and is not what christ wanted. Why else have free will if you are told what to believe and just accept it? Why did God not make us all zombies that just grovel led? That is the crux of your problem because that is what your satan wanted. Live your life as the example and let the strays come to you. That is what I get out of it. Forcing people to your view will make people flee that premise because it is not natural and is like shira law as the muslims have. We all make mistakes. Christ wanted us to and come to him when we finally see. I think that is what most christians on here forget and judge and accuse when in doing that your demeaning the redeemer.

 

[jillian]

nice troll thread for bigoted pongscum.

 

[jillian]

He was a street preacher and they are the worst. The Homo as you called him probably got sick of being told what a sinner he was and approached him, I'd like to see the other side of the story.

Hey dumb ass, the homo approached the preacher looking for a debate. You fail

Why dont you seek out and post the other side of the story?

Like.. you know, read the actual grievance.

she not interested in the facts just gay bashing..

shocking...

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The homo set the Christian up, then they wonder why people are getting sick of their shit

Judge Orders Christian To Pay Homosexual For Using “Inappropriate” Bible Verse

Christian Concern reports that Michael Overd was unjustly ordered by District Judge Shamim Ahmed Qureshi to pay a homosexual “victim” compensation of nearly $1,800 for causing him “emotional pain.”

What was Overd’s crime? It all began when he was approached by the homosexual for a biblical debate to which Overd obliged, unknowingly walking right into a trap.

“My motivation for preaching the gospel is my love for Jesus Christ and my deep concern for people who do not know His great love and are heading towards an eternity separated from God,” Overd passionately expressed.

But Judge Qureshi didn’t see Overd’s quoting scripture as a good thing or legal right for that matter.

Judge Qureshi told Overd that he should not have referred to Leviticus chapter 20 in making his point, reasoning that the lengthy chapter mentions that the law of the land in those times was death for homosexuals. Instead, Qureshi said that he should have used Leviticus 18, which the judge thinks is a much more semantically kinder warning to homosexuals.

Judge Orders Christian To Pay Homosexual For Using Inappropriate Bible Verse

"Of course, no offender wants their offenses pointed out, which is why homosexuals are so angered by Christians simply disagreeing with or warning them of their lifestyle."

No, it's because not everyone's a Christian.

"Overd and his wife outside of the court where he underwent trial."

While I conceed the photo of he and his wife together, the wife could have been born male...If not I'm not sure where the homosexual part comes in.

 

[TimothysAlaska]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Nope not at all, forgiveness perhaps, and not to judge. As far as Leviticus 20 goes God hates divorce and those that commit adultery should be put to death, not only gays but so as I said perhaps 100 million Americans most likely more then that should be put to death. You cannot claim just gay people if your going to quote that verse and anyone who divorces and marries again should be put to death because that is adultery, Like I said before, you guys pick and choose what to follow, and convienantly forget the sins you commit.

Besides the fact the New Testament trumps the Old Testament so unless your Jewish you really should not be quoting verses that is obsolete due to Jesus's sacrifice.

You missed the point altogether. Jesus is not a different God than the one that gave the law on Mt. Sinai, he is the same. That's your first mistake. The second is your assumption that the gospels are an exhaustive account of all Jesus taught. They aren't. In fact, the teachings of Christ are reflected in the teachings of his apostles and their immediate successors, most notably Paul and Jude who warned of the sin of homosexuality. The third mistake you make is the fallacy that disobeying some of God's laws renders the rest void. It doesn't. Such is the folly of trying to interpret the word of God without actually knowing God.

Sigh and as for they are the same God from the Old Testament to the new.....brings an interesting dilemma for you because reading the surface of it the God in both books are completely different. And since they are the same God then you will also have to say that God must have evolved from a vengful God of sacrifice to one of redemption which of course puts the whole scripture in the realm of evolving with God. Old Testament says those who break my commandments and as in Leviticus 20 should be put to death eye for an eye to turn the other cheek. It is interesting you said that because if God has evolved then how can he be perfect?

 

[LoneLaugher]

What the fuck!!!!? So...if you are debating a person...and you hurt their feelings...they can sue and win money for "emotional distress"???

This will.never stand. A judge cant rule a monetary award...based on that judge disagreeing with which Bible verse was appropriate in a religious debate. Talk about separation of church and state.

Cant believe the homo was so immature to take on a court case over it.

Why are you so gullible and stupid?

Do nutters ever question the veracity of RW news reports? Ever?

 

[TimothysAlaska]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Nope not at all, forgiveness perhaps, and not to judge. As far as Leviticus 20 goes God hates divorce and those that commit adultery should be put to death, not only gays but so as I said perhaps 100 million Americans most likely more then that should be put to death. You cannot claim just gay people if your going to quote that verse and anyone who divorces and marries again should be put to death because that is adultery, Like I said before, you guys pick and choose what to follow, and convienantly forget the sins you commit.

Besides the fact the New Testament trumps the Old Testament so unless your Jewish you really should not be quoting verses that is obsolete due to Jesus's sacrifice.

You missed the point altogether. Jesus is not a different God than the one that gave the law on Mt. Sinai, he is the same. That's your first mistake. The second is your assumption that the gospels are an exhaustive account of all Jesus taught. They aren't. In fact, the teachings of Christ are reflected in the teachings of his apostles and their immediate successors, most notably Paul and Jude who warned of the sin of homosexuality. The third mistake you make is the fallacy that disobeying some of God's laws renders the rest void. It doesn't. Such is the folly of trying to interpret the word of God without actually knowing God.

Your third point is not what I am doing, it is what all of you do. Railing against the Sins of homosexuality and claiming holier then thou and voiding the rest. Your second point is the apostles....they were men as you and I are men. They did not believe Jesus until he taught them, they made mistakes and lived their life as you and I have. As I said they only went to Christ when they were ready. But as you said with every reflection as in the teachings of Christ by the apostles and their successors, there is some things lost or distorted as a ripple on the water changes the reflection on the water, same as a man teaching christ teachings is represented by him that teaches it, it will always be imperfect, and not the same as the original picture ie Christ. And your last point saying I do not know God....how can anyone live and not know God? whether it is your own belief/ reflection or mine, to be alive is to know him to think about his teachings also you know him.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Nope not at all, forgiveness perhaps, and not to judge. As far as Leviticus 20 goes God hates divorce and those that commit adultery should be put to death, not only gays but so as I said perhaps 100 million Americans most likely more then that should be put to death. You cannot claim just gay people if your going to quote that verse and anyone who divorces and marries again should be put to death because that is adultery, Like I said before, you guys pick and choose what to follow, and convienantly forget the sins you commit.

Besides the fact the New Testament trumps the Old Testament so unless your Jewish you really should not be quoting verses that is obsolete due to Jesus's sacrifice.

You missed the point altogether. Jesus is not a different God than the one that gave the law on Mt. Sinai, he is the same. That's your first mistake. The second is your assumption that the gospels are an exhaustive account of all Jesus taught. They aren't. In fact, the teachings of Christ are reflected in the teachings of his apostles and their immediate successors, most notably Paul and Jude who warned of the sin of homosexuality. The third mistake you make is the fallacy that disobeying some of God's laws renders the rest void. It doesn't. Such is the folly of trying to interpret the word of God without actually knowing God.

Sigh and as for they are the same God from the Old Testament to the new.....brings an interesting dilemma for you because reading the surface of it the God in both books are completely different. And since they are the same God then you will also have to say that God must have evolved from a vengful God of sacrifice to one of redemption which of course puts the whole scripture in the realm of evolving with God. Old Testament says those who break my commandments and as in Leviticus 20 should be put to death eye for an eye to turn the other cheek. It is interesting you said that because if God has evolved then how can he be perfect?

Jesus spent much of his ministry predicting in dire terms the utter and complete destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in reciprocity for what they would do to him. It is the same God, the problem is, you Leftists have South Park Jesus, a pot smoking hippie with nary a cross word to say, the real Jesus of the Bible is the very same holy God that gave the eternal standard of righteousness to Moses and the Israelites on Mt. Sinai. And I never said God "evolved", that's your notion not mine. Get to know who God is, then you'll make fewer mistakes in knowing what God's character is.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Nope not at all, forgiveness perhaps, and not to judge. As far as Leviticus 20 goes God hates divorce and those that commit adultery should be put to death, not only gays but so as I said perhaps 100 million Americans most likely more then that should be put to death. You cannot claim just gay people if your going to quote that verse and anyone who divorces and marries again should be put to death because that is adultery, Like I said before, you guys pick and choose what to follow, and convienantly forget the sins you commit.

Besides the fact the New Testament trumps the Old Testament so unless your Jewish you really should not be quoting verses that is obsolete due to Jesus's sacrifice.

You missed the point altogether. Jesus is not a different God than the one that gave the law on Mt. Sinai, he is the same. That's your first mistake. The second is your assumption that the gospels are an exhaustive account of all Jesus taught. They aren't. In fact, the teachings of Christ are reflected in the teachings of his apostles and their immediate successors, most notably Paul and Jude who warned of the sin of homosexuality. The third mistake you make is the fallacy that disobeying some of God's laws renders the rest void. It doesn't. Such is the folly of trying to interpret the word of God without actually knowing God.

Look dude what I am saying is people have free will. Those that live their life and find their way to Christ is a powerful thing, let them make their own choices and they will come to Christ on their own accord, which is more powerful then just believing what you were told as a child. Forcing people to accept Christ before they are ready does injustice to their life and is not what christ wanted. Why else have free will if you are told what to believe and just accept it? Why did God not make us all zombies that just grovel led? That is the crux of your problem because that is what your satan wanted. Live your life as the example and let the strays come to you. That is what I get out of it. Forcing people to your view will make people flee that premise because it is not natural and is like shira law as the muslims have. We all make mistakes. Christ wanted us to and come to him when we finally see. I think that is what most christians on here forget and judge and accuse when in doing that your demeaning the redeemer.

We all make mistakes, which is why Jesus calls sinners to REPENT. Short of that, you're going to pay for those mistakes.

 

[bodecea]

The homo set the Christian up, then they wonder why people are getting sick of their shit

Judge Orders Christian To Pay Homosexual For Using “Inappropriate” Bible Verse

Christian Concern reports that Michael Overd was unjustly ordered by District Judge Shamim Ahmed Qureshi to pay a homosexual “victim” compensation of nearly $1,800 for causing him “emotional pain.”

What was Overd’s crime? It all began when he was approached by the homosexual for a biblical debate to which Overd obliged, unknowingly walking right into a trap.

“My motivation for preaching the gospel is my love for Jesus Christ and my deep concern for people who do not know His great love and are heading towards an eternity separated from God,” Overd passionately expressed.

But Judge Qureshi didn’t see Overd’s quoting scripture as a good thing or legal right for that matter.

Judge Qureshi told Overd that he should not have referred to Leviticus chapter 20 in making his point, reasoning that the lengthy chapter mentions that the law of the land in those times was death for homosexuals. Instead, Qureshi said that he should have used Leviticus 18, which the judge thinks is a much more semantically kinder warning to homosexuals.

Judge Orders Christian To Pay Homosexual For Using Inappropriate Bible Verse

Should have known soon as I read it,it was somewhere that doesn't care for free speech. England is going down he toilet bowl of history. So much rich history and culture down the drain...

When has the UK EVER had free speech?

Hell if I know. Have they?

If you don't know...why would you say that England (which is only part of the UK, btw) is going down the toilet bowl of history?

Its not only because they don't have free speech even if they had not had free speech they have criminalized speech that might hurt the feelings of some non white invader,faggot,female whatever...the country is drowning in a cesspool of politically correct shit.

In other words, they should be like us.

 

[hadit]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Did you read the Biblical reference? Because if you did, you wouldn't say that. Focusing solely on homosexuality is no more a complete presentation of the Gospel than is focusing solely on fornication.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Did you read the Biblical reference? Because if you did, you wouldn't say that. Focusing solely on homosexuality is no more a complete presentation of the Gospel than is focusing solely on fornication.

Jesus called sinners to repentance, not to continue living in sin. Those who read the gospels understand this. Your South Park Jesus doesn't exist.

 

[hadit]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Nope not at all, forgiveness perhaps, and not to judge. As far as Leviticus 20 goes God hates divorce and those that commit adultery should be put to death, not only gays but so as I said perhaps 100 million Americans most likely more then that should be put to death. You cannot claim just gay people if your going to quote that verse and anyone who divorces and marries again should be put to death because that is adultery, Like I said before, you guys pick and choose what to follow, and convienantly forget the sins you commit.

Besides the fact the New Testament trumps the Old Testament so unless your Jewish you really should not be quoting verses that is obsolete due to Jesus's sacrifice.

You missed the point altogether. Jesus is not a different God than the one that gave the law on Mt. Sinai, he is the same. That's your first mistake. The second is your assumption that the gospels are an exhaustive account of all Jesus taught. They aren't. In fact, the teachings of Christ are reflected in the teachings of his apostles and their immediate successors, most notably Paul and Jude who warned of the sin of homosexuality. The third mistake you make is the fallacy that disobeying some of God's laws renders the rest void. It doesn't. Such is the folly of trying to interpret the word of God without actually knowing God.

That is the point of what I posted. It is correct to state that homosexuality is wrong and against God's Law. It is not correct, however, to act like it is some kind of "super sin" that trumps all others. There are two commandments that Jesus taught. If you get those two right, you'll get all the others as well.

1. Love God.
2. Love your neighbor.

If you love God, you'll do what He commands.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Nope not at all, forgiveness perhaps, and not to judge. As far as Leviticus 20 goes God hates divorce and those that commit adultery should be put to death, not only gays but so as I said perhaps 100 million Americans most likely more then that should be put to death. You cannot claim just gay people if your going to quote that verse and anyone who divorces and marries again should be put to death because that is adultery, Like I said before, you guys pick and choose what to follow, and convienantly forget the sins you commit.

Besides the fact the New Testament trumps the Old Testament so unless your Jewish you really should not be quoting verses that is obsolete due to Jesus's sacrifice.

You missed the point altogether. Jesus is not a different God than the one that gave the law on Mt. Sinai, he is the same. That's your first mistake. The second is your assumption that the gospels are an exhaustive account of all Jesus taught. They aren't. In fact, the teachings of Christ are reflected in the teachings of his apostles and their immediate successors, most notably Paul and Jude who warned of the sin of homosexuality. The third mistake you make is the fallacy that disobeying some of God's laws renders the rest void. It doesn't. Such is the folly of trying to interpret the word of God without actually knowing God.

That is the point of what I posted. It is correct to state that homosexuality is wrong and against God's Law. It is not correct, however, to act like it is some kind of "super sin" that trumps all others. There are two commandments that Jesus taught. If you get those two right, you'll get all the others as well.

1. Love God.
2. Love your neighbor.

If you love God, you'll do what He commands.

Loving God and loving your neighbor does not give somebody a pass to live a sinful lifestyle.....and more people are doing that just by shacking up than homosexuals, I agree. All sin is equal in its capacity to forever separate us from the love of God and all sinners, homosexuals, fornicators, adulterers, and even "nice people" are called to repentance. "For there is no other name under heaven, given among men, by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12)

 

[hadit]

Leviticus 20 is soo easy to debate. The gay fellow should not had debated him if he did not know about the bible. All he had to do was refer to the New Testament. And if not that, use Leviticus 20 against the preacher because he convienantly left out a lot of the other parts. Dumb on the gay fellows part. Because if we did use Leviticus 20 as some type of law I am pretty sure at least 100 million Americans would be put to death....lol

I, as a Christian, would have sent the preacher to James 2:10 and schooled him on what Jesus taught.

So you would have labored to convince him that Jesus contradicted himself by teaching homosexuality was ok when in fact he taught it was an abomination on Mt. Sinai. Got it.

Did you read the Biblical reference? Because if you did, you wouldn't say that. Focusing solely on homosexuality is no more a complete presentation of the Gospel than is focusing solely on fornication.

Jesus called sinners to repentance, not to continue living in sin. Those who read the gospels understand this. Your South Park Jesus doesn't exist.

Since you don't seem to have read it, here it is:

8 If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing right.9 But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers. For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. For he who said, “You shall not commit adultery,” If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker.

You don't seem to understand that, if you want to live according to just one part of the law, you will be judged by the entire law. For this preacher to cite Leviticus as condemnation for homosexual sin makes him vulnerable to being criticized for wearing more than one type of thread in his clothes, for just one example. Yes, homosexuality is sin, that's understood. Where the Church does wrong is to then treat homosexuals as being second class citizens, undesirables, unclean, etc, and refusing to associate with them. Yes, sin must be repented of, but EVERY person who comes to Christ is equally in sin as any homosexual. Do you want to know where Jesus would be if He were here in the flesh today?

1. Standing on the street corner, shouting to one and all that homosexuals are going to burn in hell.
2. In Church on a Sunday morning, carefully shutting the door to make sure no homosexuals accidentally wander in.
3. In a gay bar, meeting gay people and convincing them that they, too, can be forgiven of ALL their sin and they can be His disciples.