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

[ty_ping]

IceDust3

PoeticVengeance

IceDust3

If your true to god ...your going to play by his rules ALL of them.
If your untrue you pick and choose which one you want to!

By the by you didn't comment on the whole 'what right do you have to judge them' thing.

And one of his rules tells you that the Old Laws are now no longer applicable.

So you appear to be ignoring that important one.

So if there is a law that says that the old laws no longer apply, then why do we have Seventh Day Adventists?

Because they`re a type of Morman and the Mormans have had a second prophet (or more?) which means FOR THEM someone/thing came back and clarified all those debatable nuances of the Bible.
However if you simply use the bible and not the revised texts they have then they`ve no leg to argue on either.

[ty_ping]

Son of Krypton

SoundDoctrine

Son of Krypton

I may not agree with the issue of gay marriage, but I see the issue of divorce to be a far more pressing concern to me.

Well, since divorce isn't the issue at hand, could you expand on why you do not agree with the issue of gay marriage?

Ok, I'll see what I can do, though I haven't heard exactly what it would entail in great detail.

I believe that the actual act of homosexuality is wrong, because it takes place outside of the current boundaries of marriage. I refuse to get into the discussion of whether God doesn't like homosexuals or not, becauswe I believe he loves everyone, and Fred Phelps out at that psycho church in Kansas is probably headed to hell faster than the gays he hates. But I digress.

The institution of marriage has been around longer than any other institution in history, before religion, and certainly before any type of government. The anthropological record has many examples of male-female pairing for life for protection, companionship, and the good old roll in the hay every once and again. I don't know if they found any evidence of same-sex pairings, but if they did, they didn't last more than one generation, simply because of the biological implications of being unable to reproduce.

A marrage only lasts one generation anyway simply because people are mortal, But anyway there have been lots of same sex marrages. Within the early christian church within Native American culture, Indian culture, and Asian culture. The unions usually result in adoption or if you believe in miricals that the overpowering manliness of one partner and the womanlyness of the other are able to join and they really do give birth irregardless of sex it`s been said to happen.)

Quote:

Personally, I don't understand the mentality if a homosexual individual, simply because I'm not one, and I can't understand what I'm not very well. But I do know they want companionship, and either a biological function, or maybe some kind of psychological episode occurred at a young age, and now they find the same sex attractive for some reason.

I feel same-sex marriage could be very damaging to the family because it affects so many different things in culture. It could teach that the traditional gender roles of a father and mother are unnecessary,

Same argumet was made when women said they wanted to marry who they want, vote and work.
Gender roles are overrated and if anything stupid and already ******** beyond all hell.

Quote:

I've also heard people compare it to interracial marriages and things of that nature. However, racism is about keeping races apart, whereas marriage is about bringing people together. In addition, they've done studies of interracial children and single-sex household children, and while interracial children have little problems adjusting to "normal" life, children raised with two mothers or fathers have a considerable harder time about it.

As did interracial children 30+ years ago the only reason these people have problems is because other people give them a hard time, no hard time, no problem. To tell homosexuals to stop marrying, and stop breeding and adopting is just as crule and logical as telling it to people of different races to do the same.

And

I`d like to see this study because I`ve heard otherwise.

[ty_ping]

bookmark page 12, I will catch up!!

[jaden kendam]

ty_ping

angel_magic2007

IceDust3

True..you've got me there...but some laws dont apply to todays world. So here is the questions how does one decide what laws to follow and which ones not to?

The old laws set up by Moses was outsetted by Christ death on the cross. Jesus when preaching marriage and divorce never talked about homosexual marriage. Hebrews 13:4 says very clearly that sexual immorality is wrong ande is punishable by God. Hebrews 13:4 "Marriage should be homored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge tghe adulterer and all the sexually immoral."

Anyone else find it ironic that one one had she says the Torah is no longer valid due to Jesus, and then turns around and quotes from the Torah as her justification against homosexuality?

Is it Irony or just Ignorance? Do tell us please, because that makes my head hurt.

[Natas Ferret]

deadmanjake

ty_ping

angel_magic2007

IceDust3

True..you've got me there...but some laws dont apply to todays world. So here is the questions how does one decide what laws to follow and which ones not to?

The old laws set up by Moses was outsetted by Christ death on the cross. Jesus when preaching marriage and divorce never talked about homosexual marriage. Hebrews 13:4 says very clearly that sexual immorality is wrong ande is punishable by God. Hebrews 13:4 "Marriage should be homored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge tghe adulterer and all the sexually immoral."

Anyone else find it ironic that one one had she says the Torah is no longer valid due to Jesus, and then turns around and quotes from the Torah as her justification against homosexuality?

Is it Irony or just Ignorance? Do tell us please, because that makes my head hurt.

Er, Hebrews is in the New Testament.

However, I don't see how the verse quoted applies to homosexual marriages.

[x[The.WTF.Monkey]x]

Gay marriage? So what. God said, "Dont judge your fellow man" and hes right. If your fellow wants to marry another man, so what@!?


GOD MADE MAN. Just man. He dident make christians or jews or muslims. He made MAN. He gave man FREE WILL. We can do anything we want, but there will always be consequences. Always.That means we can be gay or "homosexual" or bisexual, or whatever. God dosent give a s**t. Thats as bad as saying if you win a contest, the gods think you are in the right, but if you lose, then your opponent cheated or your gear was faulty. Do ye really think the gods sit up there betting on horse races?@!

Im all for gay marriage. However, I am not gay. I support man's free will. I do not support man's free will to violence or murder.

[Elf Lord Chiewn]

Natas Ferret

deadmanjake

ty_ping

angel_magic2007

IceDust3

True..you've got me there...but some laws dont apply to todays world. So here is the questions how does one decide what laws to follow and which ones not to?

The old laws set up by Moses was outsetted by Christ death on the cross. Jesus when preaching marriage and divorce never talked about homosexual marriage. Hebrews 13:4 says very clearly that sexual immorality is wrong ande is punishable by God. Hebrews 13:4 "Marriage should be homored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge tghe adulterer and all the sexually immoral."

Anyone else find it ironic that one one had she says the Torah is no longer valid due to Jesus, and then turns around and quotes from the Torah as her justification against homosexuality?

Is it Irony or just Ignorance? Do tell us please, because that makes my head hurt.

Er, Hebrews is in the New Testament.

However, I don't see how the verse quoted applies to homosexual marriages.

It doesn't, unless you predicate your eisegesis on the Torah.

[Mixolydia]

A friend of mine brought up a good point while we were sitting in biology (when we didn't need to listen to the teacher, obviously)....She's very Christian, and very open and accepting. She was telling me how that apparently the bible does say it's wrong to be homosexual, and that in a debate of "Sin vs. Not Sin," she'd recite the scripture, and that's that.

I still don't see where in the bible it explicitly says that homosexuality is a sin, but that's just me. She also brought up that she could care less about someone's orientation in that respect, and that she has family members who are gay. She loves them to death, but because of her beliefs, says that they're taking a risk. sweatdrop

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I still don't understand why a lot of Christians, even though they claim to be justified, can condemn their fellow humans because a book says they're going to hell for who they love. I don't think it's one's business to tell someone that they're condemned to the pits of fire and brimstone just because of that. sweatdrop

That, and the nature of saying that kinda comes off as arrogant on the accuser's behalf.

[Kalil Chernov]

ty_ping

IceDust3

PoeticVengeance

IceDust3

If your true to god ...your going to play by his rules ALL of them.
If your untrue you pick and choose which one you want to!

By the by you didn't comment on the whole 'what right do you have to judge them' thing.

And one of his rules tells you that the Old Laws are now no longer applicable.

So you appear to be ignoring that important one.

So if there is a law that says that the old laws no longer apply, then why do we have Seventh Day Adventists?

Because they`re a type of Morman and the Mormans have had a second prophet (or more?) which means FOR THEM someone/thing came back and clarified all those debatable nuances of the Bible.
However if you simply use the bible and not the revised texts they have then they`ve no leg to argue on either.

No, they're not a type of Mormon. The Seventh Day Adventist Church dates back to the Millerite movement of the 1840s, an End of Days cult that altered their philosophies to fit the fact that the second coming did not occur in 1844, as they had predicted. No relation whatsoever to the mormon church, beyond their shared origins as a cult of personality following a charismatic leader.
Gee, sounds like certain other religions I could mention. Like, nearly all of them. >.<

[Kalil Chernov]

Poindextra

A friend of mine brought up a good point while we were sitting in biology (when we didn't need to listen to the teacher, obviously)....She's very Christian, and very open and accepting. She was telling me how that apparently the bible does say it's wrong to be homosexual, and that in a debate of "Sin vs. Not Sin," she'd recite the scripture, and that's that.

I still don't see where in the bible it explicitly says that homosexuality is a sin, but that's just me. She also brought up that she could care less about someone's orientation in that respect, and that she has family members who are gay. She loves them to death, but because of her beliefs, says that they're taking a risk. sweatdrop

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I still don't understand why a lot of Christians, even though they claim to be justified, can condemn their fellow humans because a book says they're going to hell for who they love. I don't think it's one's business to tell someone that they're condemned to the pits of fire and brimstone just because of that. sweatdrop

That, and the nature of saying that kinda comes off as arrogant on the accuser's behalf.

Two things to keep in mind:
First of all, the bible has very little, if anything, to say about homosexuality. One passage in Corinthians that is more likely refferring to specific practices of ***** behavior, one passage in romans that was refferring to mass orgies, two passages in leviticus that have the same value to christians as the prohibition against eating pork, and the story of sodom and gommorrah, which is pretty clearly a case of gang rape.
Second, even if it is a sin, all people are sinners. The habit of modern conservative christians to harp incessently about the evils of homosexuality, while ignoring their own failures, is rank hypocrisy. Christ himself said not one word on homosexuality or abortion or any of the other hot-button christian issues of the day. He was far too concerned with aiding the poor and the sick.

[Toast_Lady]

I don't feel like I can contribute anything worthwhile, but I really want to thank everyone for this thread. I am learning so much from it.

This may have been talked about already, but I haven't been able to scroll through all 23 pages yet. I was wondering what people have to say about Matthew 5:17-19 where Jesus says he did not come to abolish the old law, but fulfill it. If the new law renders the old law moot, why would Jesus say this?

[Sound Doxa]

Toast_Lady

I don't feel like I can contribute anything worthwhile, but I really want to thank everyone for this thread. I am learning so much from it.

This may have been talked about already, but I haven't been able to scroll through all 23 pages yet. I was wondering what people have to say about Matthew 5:17-19 where Jesus says he did not come to abolish the old law, but fulfill it. If the new law renders the old law moot, why would Jesus say this?

In Matthew 5:17-19, the word for fufill is pleroo, and it means to render full, like to complete it.
Jesus did complete the law on the cross.
We now have the the Law of Agape.

[ty_ping]

Chief Captain Moroni

chrisoya

Chief Captain Moroni

elf lord is wrong

Elf Lord is right.

See, my statement has more truthiness than yours, because I used proper capitalisation and punctuation. If you can't handle such advanced linguistic techniques, could you at least provide some evidence to support your assertion?

He is not my lord, so I will not capitalize his name... sorry. Why don't you prove it's wrong, instead.

Peace out

Part of this makes me think "If someones name is Lord, and you refuse to call them by ther name because they are not `A` Lord, would you take a bite out of someone called Ichigo?"

[Marshal67]

Ishi Giant

FREE WILL!

Can you prove we have free will darling?

[Jaaten Syric]

ty_ping

Chief Captain Moroni

chrisoya

Chief Captain Moroni

elf lord is wrong

Elf Lord is right.

See, my statement has more truthiness than yours, because I used proper capitalisation and punctuation. If you can't handle such advanced linguistic techniques, could you at least provide some evidence to support your assertion?

He is not my lord, so I will not capitalize his name... sorry. Why don't you prove it's wrong, instead.

Peace out

Part of this makes me think "If someones name is Lord, and you refuse to call them by ther name because they are not `A` Lord, would you take a bite out of someone called Ichigo?"

Are we assuming this isn't a cannibalistic cabal ty?