If you are against gay marriage, you are a bad Christian.

[Priest of Merwynism]

ty_ping

Skiddishfit

ty_ping

Dei Servus

ty_ping

If Baptism makes people perfectly equal, (One spirit one body) then why can't baptised women run the Church if they are now on equal footing with the men?

It doesn't make us perfectly equal. It gives us an equal chance of salvation and status as people in the eyes of God. But I am still a man, and you are still a woman.

But if we're equil in the eyes of God then how come women on an earthly scale have to be inferior?

What causes you to think in the Christian scope women are inferior?

Because they are not permited to hold positions of power within the church and I think are technically banned from teaching scripture in general.

that only applies to catholicism in general and perhaps some denominations of protestantism.
it varies from denomination to denomionation.

however, i personally think it's an illegitimate practice.
there is biblical evidence of female teachers, such as the apostle thecla.

[Ad.min can suck my balls]

Priest of Merwynism

that only applies to catholicism in general and perhaps some denominations of protestantism.
it varies from denomination to denomionation.

however, i personally think it's an illegitimate practice.
there is biblical evidence of female teachers, such as the apostle thecla.

Any denomination that allows a woman anything is a fluffy bunny Christian.

1 Timothy 2:11

Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence.

[Striga]

Ad.min can suck my balls

Priest of Merwynism

that only applies to catholicism in general and perhaps some denominations of protestantism.
it varies from denomination to denomionation.

however, i personally think it's an illegitimate practice.
there is biblical evidence of female teachers, such as the apostle thecla.

Any denomination that allows a woman anything is a fluffy bunny Christian.

1 Timothy 2:11

Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence.

Better stop being Catholic then.
I'm pretty sure they've got some female nuns around.

[Striga]

Ad.min can suck my balls

Striga

Incorrect.

Ad hominem tu quoque is the fallacy of saying someone's argument must be wrong because the person making it is a hypocrite.

HOW THE ******** WAS WHAT I SAID NOT THAT?

Bill, gay sex is wrong
Jim, you are gay. What the ******** are you talking about?

Because in the English language, the meaning you convey is based on the words you use, not what you were thinking at the time you used them.

[Aino Ailill]

Ad.min can suck my balls

Priest of Merwynism

that only applies to catholicism in general and perhaps some denominations of protestantism.
it varies from denomination to denomionation.

however, i personally think it's an illegitimate practice.
there is biblical evidence of female teachers, such as the apostle thecla.

Any denomination that allows a woman anything is a fluffy bunny Christian.

1 Timothy 2:11

Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence.

Paul, in this letter, referred to himself in the first person singular. Why should it be assumed that this is the will of the Lord?

[Masturbating_Rot_Crow]

Aino Ailill

Ad.min can suck my balls

Priest of Merwynism

that only applies to catholicism in general and perhaps some denominations of protestantism.
it varies from denomination to denomionation.

however, i personally think it's an illegitimate practice.
there is biblical evidence of female teachers, such as the apostle thecla.

Any denomination that allows a woman anything is a fluffy bunny Christian.

1 Timothy 2:11

Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence.

Paul, in this letter, referred to himself in the first person singular. Why should it be assumed that this is the will of the Lord?

Paul is more filler-bible at best. No one knows how much of Paul is even really Paul, so it could be the word of anyone. Not a very good backing.

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

Masturbating_Rot_Crow

Aino Ailill

Ad.min can suck my balls

Priest of Merwynism

that only applies to catholicism in general and perhaps some denominations of protestantism.
it varies from denomination to denomionation.

however, i personally think it's an illegitimate practice.
there is biblical evidence of female teachers, such as the apostle thecla.

Any denomination that allows a woman anything is a fluffy bunny Christian.

1 Timothy 2:11

Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence.

Paul, in this letter, referred to himself in the first person singular. Why should it be assumed that this is the will of the Lord?

Paul is more filler-bible at best. No one knows how much of Paul is even really Paul, so it could be the word of anyone. Not a very good backing.

Not that the rest of the canon is especially clear in regard to authorship. At least the Pauline Epistles aren't pretentious enough to claim to be God's words, despite a few nuggets that clearly reference words which ride on such claims.

Also, heart .

[Ad.min can suck my balls]

Aino Ailill

Paul, in this letter, referred to himself in the first person singular. Why should it be assumed that this is the will of the Lord?

Because it's in the canonized Bible.

[Marshal67]

Ad.min can suck my balls

Aino Ailill

Paul, in this letter, referred to himself in the first person singular. Why should it be assumed that this is the will of the Lord?

Because it's in the canonized Bible.

Which is good enough for me to take it seriously. If it is cannonized, I believe it to be the will of YHVH.

[Striga]

Ad.min can suck my balls

Aino Ailill

Paul, in this letter, referred to himself in the first person singular. Why should it be assumed that this is the will of the Lord?

Because it's in the canonized Bible.

So god said everything that anyone said in the bible? How's that work?
Paul was still speaking in the first person singular.

[braidedsilver]

Striga

Ad.min can suck my balls

Aino Ailill

Paul, in this letter, referred to himself in the first person singular. Why should it be assumed that this is the will of the Lord?

Because it's in the canonized Bible.

So god said everything that anyone said in the bible? How's that work?
Paul was still speaking in the first person singular.

Then the nswer must be that Paul is God in some way shape or form.

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

Marshal67

Ad.min can suck my balls

Aino Ailill

Paul, in this letter, referred to himself in the first person singular. Why should it be assumed that this is the will of the Lord?

Because it's in the canonized Bible.

Which is good enough for me to take it seriously. If it is cannonized, I believe it to be the will of YHVH.

That it should be in the canon?
Context still applies.

[Marshal67]

Elf Lord Chiewn

Marshal67

Ad.min can suck my balls

Aino Ailill

Paul, in this letter, referred to himself in the first person singular. Why should it be assumed that this is the will of the Lord?

Because it's in the canonized Bible.

Which is good enough for me to take it seriously. If it is cannonized, I believe it to be the will of YHVH.

That it should be in the canon?
Context still applies.

Context of course, in the time.

But if it is within the Bible. It is my belief it is the will/word of God. Maybe He is speaking through someone else, maybe He is speaking directly. But God destined the Bible to be as it is.

Meh, call me old fasioned as far as this goes ^_^

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

Marshal67

Elf Lord Chiewn

Marshal67

Ad.min can suck my balls

Aino Ailill

Paul, in this letter, referred to himself in the first person singular. Why should it be assumed that this is the will of the Lord?

Because it's in the canonized Bible.

Which is good enough for me to take it seriously. If it is cannonized, I believe it to be the will of YHVH.

That it should be in the canon?
Context still applies.

Context of course, in the time.

But if it is within the Bible. It is my belief it is the will/word of God. Maybe He is speaking through someone else, maybe He is speaking directly. But God destined the Bible to be as it is.

Meh, call me old fasioned as far as this goes ^_^

Of course.

I wonder why it's so ambiguous, then.

Okay. You're old-fashioned. ^^

[Marshal67]

Elf Lord Chiewn

I wonder why it's so ambiguous, then.

Well, another Christian Doctrine is with Salvation comes understanding, thus being saved is a requirement to truly understand the Bible.

I think this can be true, to a point since I believe it is always better to look at things from the inside. But then you have to wander why those on the inside disagree then.

Hmmm, I wonder indeed whee

Quote:

Okay. You're old-fashioned. ^^

See I told my friends in the church(who no longer speak to me...) that I am no Heretic to God! He is the oldest after all ^_^