|
|
Post by snow on Mar 29, 2014 11:34:03 GMT -5
after reading that timeline im gonna say that gays haven't suffered nearly as much as blacks did for civil rights... And that's bad how? Their suffering has just begun and it wouldn't even be an issue if it wasn't for all those loving God fearing people out there! Good grief, listen to yourselves! Really. How does the marriage of two people who love each other hurt you poor persecuted Christians? Love is love no matter how you shake it. Should people stop serving people who believe in supernatural beings? They are dangerous to some segments of the population after all. Look at their views on the gay community after all. And, it's because of their belief in a supernatural being. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Mar 29, 2014 11:36:02 GMT -5
How does one tell the difference? through prayer, comparing scripture and revelation What's the difference? I have had revelations that I'm definitely sure you don't share. Who's revelations are right? Your's or mine? Or are they really just individual opinions and revelations have absolutely nothing to do with them. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Mar 29, 2014 11:37:01 GMT -5
Does that mean then that gays should should feel blessed when Christians hate them and reproach them. Does this mean that Christians will be cast out for hating gays? nope Why not? Do you think God loves you for than a gay person? Do you feel justified in hating gays? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2014 11:38:29 GMT -5
the comparison was the gay rights struggle was equal to the blacks civil rights movement...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2014 11:39:30 GMT -5
Why not? Do you think God loves you for than a gay person? Do you feel justified in hating gays? hate the sin love the sinner...i love my lesbian cousin but i hate what she is doing... |
|
|
|
Post by faune on Mar 29, 2014 11:44:12 GMT -5
i agree in a couple of places paul didn't always speak by inspiration of God but of tradition or custom... How does one tell the difference? Snow ~ Perhaps this will help to explain Wally's remark above? I was just discussing this matter earlier in my previous post. One area that comes to mind is where Paul was stating his own POV on long hair and why it was viewed this way back in time. It turns out that it was to show the woman's subjection to men in the house of worship.  I really enjoyed this "deductive Bible study tools" commentary on this subject, which helps you understand more clearly the meaning of Paul's word back in time by filling in on the customs existing within the first century. If you check out I Corinthians 11:5-16 in the Amplified Version below, I believe you will get a clearer understanding of Paul's exhortation within the context of scripture?
www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/jamieson-fausset-brown/1-corinthians/1-corinthians-11.html
www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+11&version=AMP
|
|
|
|
Post by snow on Mar 29, 2014 12:10:21 GMT -5
Why not? Do you think God loves you for than a gay person? Do you feel justified in hating gays? hate the sin love the sinner...i love my lesbian cousin but i hate what she is doing... Well that's mighty good of you. Just because something disgusts you does not make it wrong. If the bible is your justification for believing this, maybe it's time to read a different book. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Mar 29, 2014 12:13:54 GMT -5
How does one tell the difference? Snow ~ Perhaps this will help in explaining Wally's remark above? One area that comes to mind where Paul was stating his own POV on long hair and why it was viewed this way back in time. It turns out that it was to show the woman's subjection to men in the house of worship. I really enjoyed this "deductive Bible study tools" commentary on this subject, which helps you understand more clearly the meaning of Paul's word back in time by filling in on the customs existing within the first century. If you check out I Corinthians 11:14-16 in the Amplified Version below, I believe you will get a clearer understanding of Paul's exhortation within the context of scripture?
www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/jamieson-fausset-brown/1-corinthians/1-corinthians-11.html
www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+11&version=AMP
I think bottom line is that the whole bible is based on what was believed in that time period. Yet people today still think it's a good book to follow? Makes no sense to me at all. Too many things have been learned that tell us the bible is wrong, yet people love to cling to these outdated ideas to justify their own prejudices and bias. For those it rules against, it is a very dangerous book to listen to. |
|
|
|
Post by hangingout on Mar 29, 2014 12:29:38 GMT -5
dmmichgood, your words are in quotations here...
“History is available about how hard a battle it was to get gay rights. You can check yourself for yourself.”I have, and continue to read the history, and you’re right that so much is available online. Did you ever check out the Rainbow History Project I recommended? Here's the link again, and also an important book is "After The Ball" (also linked).
www.rainbowhistory.org/html/apazap.htm
library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Kirk
www.goodreads.com/book/show/503597.After_the_Ball
“Why do you want to hear my own words?”I want to see your own understanding of gay history, that’s all.
“From past experience I'm sure you would just accuse me of "plagiarism" anyway.”If in school you copy content from a website and don’t enclose it in quotes, that’s considered plagiarism. I found the source of your words by googling what you wrote, and word for word, it came from a website – and I proved that. That’s the plagiarism I was referring to, but you never seemed to understand me there. It’s a minor point, anyway.“I will give you only one starting place. You can check the rest from there. Police in the past use to periodically "raid" suspected gay bars and arrest the people there. Just like they raid suspected drug places these days. Finally, in New York City at a place called Stonewall, people got tired of that kind of treatment and rebelled. It has been "long and hard battle ever since.” to obtain their civil rights.”Thank you, dmmichgood. I did learn about the Stonewall Inn in the past. The more I learn, the more helpful it is.
“You know I don't really feel much like answering your questions, when you don't answer the main question that I challenged you to answer: I challenge you and anyone to say where Jesus ever even mentioned homosexuality.”
I already answered your question, dmmichgood, at the very least, once – but I think twice. It might be that you didn’t read my answers, or you skimmed them, or you read them but refuse to believe and accept my proofs. Perhaps when you meet the Lord someday, you might ask him yourself, if you won’t believe anyone else. Yes, I know you don't believe, but maybe you will change your mind someday, when you have proof positive.
Luke 16:31, “"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'" - Jesus I also proved that Moses and Ezekiel both mention homosexuality in the context of Sodom, proving that the “gaychristian 101” website - whose text you copied and pasted - simply lied about that point.
But I am going on to prove the rest of their points. They might actually have one or two which are accurate, but I tend to doubt it. But if they do, I will find it and I will acknowledge it. If they don’t, I’ll continue exposing the rest of their lies, as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 29, 2014 12:36:01 GMT -5
How does one tell the difference? through prayer, comparing scripture and revelation
|
|
|
|
Post by faune on Mar 29, 2014 12:41:43 GMT -5
Snow shared...Snow ~ Perhaps that's where the problem lies as you brought out above?  There are many things written that pertained to the times back in history that are no longer viewed in the same light today ~ except for those who choose to hold to the inerrancy of scripture, regardless of the discrepancies and contradictions found throughout the Bible. I believe we must be realistic here and evaluate scriptural passages in light of the times they were written.
Also, there has been a lot discovered in our own generation regarding the actual construction of the Bible which should also be taken into consideration here, IMO? I have no doubt but some poetic license was taken by some scribes in the past who translated early Jewish writings and incorporated them into their worship service. When you study the Bible deductively in light of the times that the different books were written and the historical back-drop, it all becomes clearer somehow. So, perhaps enlightenment is what is needed to view the Bible more realistically? 
|
|
|
|
Post by hangingout on Mar 29, 2014 12:50:24 GMT -5
"So I guess what it all boils down to is that people are supposed to respect your views, but you Christians do not in return have to respect gays views?"
No, that isn't what it "all boils down to". I am advocating that when a gay couple are told a baker cannot make their wedding cake because they do not support the idea of two people of the same sex marrying, that the couple show that they respect diversity of opinion and go where they will find a baker who will happily do so. This is America, land of opportunity. You can have a religious difference (or should be able to), and you can choose what business to accept and what business to eschew, based on your values. What it seems to be "boiling down to" is that certain gays are of the opinion that only their views count, period. And that is what I object to.
"What possible harm can it do to Christians to serve gay couples?"
Are you asking because you want to know what someone actually thinks, or are you asking with a preconceived idea? Is this a rhetorical question?
It's not that they "refuse to serve gay couples". As already shown, Melissa's Sweet Cakes have both served and hired gays in their bakery. They stopped at the wedding cake, because they are Christians, and to them, this was a symbol of their support for something the Bible forbids. Plain and simple.
In the case of the couple in the UK, their own website already stated that they only rent to married couples, again, because of their beliefs. They did business for many years with no one complaining, and simply respecting their views -- until a couple of gay men decided to force them out of business. This is an appalling lack of the understanding of diversity and tolerance for difference. It won no hearts or minds, I might add.
"Is their money different somehow?"
It was about the principle. Money isn't everything, as I'm sure you know. They held their ground on principle.
"Are they not of the same species, human beings?"
Of course.
"Were they not all created by the same creator you claim to be created by?"
All people are created by God, and our universal creation is not the issue here. It is about having mutual respect for difference of opinion and religious views. If a gay-owned business decides that they don't want to bake and frost a cake with the words of Leviticus because it violates their own perspective, would you support their right of refusal? Would you?
Is your view of religious freedom or diversity of opinion only a one-way street? The Gay Way or No Way? I can't respect a "freedom" that is only for one perspective and no others. That is tyranny.
|
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Mar 29, 2014 13:02:57 GMT -5
after reading that timeline im gonna say that gays haven't suffered nearly as much as blacks did for civil rights... And that's bad how? Their suffering has just begun and it wouldn't even be an issue if it wasn't for all those loving God fearing people out there! Good grief, listen to yourselves! Really. How does the marriage of two people who love each other hurt you poor persecuted Christians? Love is love no matter how you shake it. Should people stop serving people who believe in supernatural beings? They are dangerous to some segments of the population after all. Look at their views on the gay community after all. And, it's because of their belief in a supernatural being. Thanks, Snow, for all you are saying on this thread. I'd like to second your "Good grief" in response to some of the attitudes being expressed here. I wish "Christian Persecution Complex" could be added to the DSM! The fight for civil rights for gay and lesbian people has become more visible over the past few decades, but discrimination and violence (including lynching and genocide) against gay and lesbian people have been around for much longer. Many gay and lesbian people of color have faced racism in the larger society and homophobia within their families and communities of color. |
|
|
|
Post by hangingout on Mar 29, 2014 13:11:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 29, 2014 13:23:23 GMT -5
dmmichgood, your words are in quotations here...
“History is available about how hard a battle it was to get gay rights. You can check yourself for yourself.”I have, and continue to read the history, and you’re right that so much is available online. Did you ever check out the Rainbow History Project I recommended? Here's the link again, and also an important book is "After The Ball" (also linked).
www.rainbowhistory.org/html/apazap.htm
library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Kirk
www.goodreads.com/book/show/503597.After_the_Ball
“Why do you want to hear my own words?”I want to see your own understanding of gay history, that’s all.
“From past experience I'm sure you would just accuse me of "plagiarism" anyway.”If in school you copy content from a website and don’t enclose it in quotes, that’s considered plagiarism. I found the source of your words by googling what you wrote, and word for word, it came from a website – and I proved that. That’s the plagiarism I was referring to, but you never seemed to understand me there. It’s a minor point, anyway.“I will give you only one starting place. You can check the rest from there. Police in the past use to periodically "raid" suspected gay bars and arrest the people there. Just like they raid suspected drug places these days. Finally, in New York City at a place called Stonewall, people got tired of that kind of treatment and rebelled. It has been "long and hard battle ever since.” to obtain their civil rights.”Thank you, dmmichgood. I did learn about the Stonewall Inn in the past. The more I learn, the more helpful it is.
“You know I don't really feel much like answering your questions, when you don't answer the main question that I challenged you to answer: I challenge you and anyone to say where Jesus ever even mentioned homosexuality.”
I already answered your question, dmmichgood, at the very least, once – but I think twice. It might be that you didn’t read my answers, or you skimmed them, or you read them but refuse to believe and accept my proofs. Perhaps when you meet the Lord someday, you might ask him yourself, if you won’t believe anyone else. Yes, I know you don't believe, but maybe you will change your mind someday, when you have proof positive.
Luke 16:31, “"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'" - Jesus I also proved that Moses and Ezekiel both mention homosexuality in the context of Sodom, proving that the “gaychristian 101” website - whose text you copied and pasted - simply lied about that point.
But I am going on to prove the rest of their points. They might actually have one or two which are accurate, but I tend to doubt it. But if they do, I will find it and I will acknowledge it. If they don’t, I’ll continue exposing the rest of their lies, as well.
I am also a long standing member of PFLAG: Parents, Families, & Friends of Lesbians and Gays.
I doubt that you will be able to send me to links that I don't already know about.
You seem bent on accusing me of "plagiarism."
Is this the article that you are talking about?
The Sin Of Sodom According To Jesus Was Not Homosexuality
"The sin of Sodom was homosexuality, according to many Christians (but not according to the Bible). We are told by modern preachers that Sodom’s destruction proves that homosexuality was the problem in Sodom and therefore, homosexuality is wrong.
The problem with that viewpoint is that it goes against the testimony of history and the testimony of scripture.
For 1700 years after God destroyed Sodom, the human authors of the Bible and the Jews as a nation described Sodom's sin as lack of hospitality, pride, idolatry, greed or gluttony but never as homosexuality.
The wickedness of the people of Sodom is well attested in ancient Jewish writings yet the Biblical witness never links Sodom to homosexuality.
The belief that God destroyed Sodom because of “homosexuality” is a late interpretation. It came into being approximately 1700 years after the destruction of Sodom.
No human author of the Old Testament linked Sodom with homosexuality. In fact, until the inter-testamental period, around 150 BC to AD 100, it is difficult to find any Jewish literature which links Sodom with homosexuality.
Since the Biblical text makes no mention of homosexuality, anti-gay commentators must read into the text, something the text does not say, in an attempt to make scripture say what they wish it said.
Moses and Ezekiel emphasize Sodom’s lack of hospitality, greed, idolatry, gluttony but never mention homosexuality as the sin of Sodom."
I can't find the site where I got that information but if it make you feel better I'll put it in quotes
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2014 13:24:40 GMT -5
through prayer, comparing scripture and revelation
because of 4000+ years of consistent biblical standards |
|
|
|
Post by hangingout on Mar 29, 2014 13:27:36 GMT -5
The battle seems far from won. Here's an interesting article on university professor William C Harris's book " Slouching Towards Gaytheism: Christianity and happy Survival in America." : Click -->> A New Breed of Breeder
I have read some writings from "happy Theology", such as one which goes into a fantasy about the details of the groin of God, which could only be considered blasphemy at best, and is certainly disgusting and vile.
How people who support this by their silence can lay claim to the title of Christian is really beyond me. If a person is sincere about the Bible and faith, I expect they are growing, as we all are, in our understanding. But when they can read what some are saying in happy Theology and just have no reaction except the "they can't help it" argument, and "the Bible is full of error" argument, I really have to wonder how sincere they really are....
There comes a point when a person does have to choose. To be a people-pleaser at all costs, (which really isn't "love" at all) or to seek to please God first and foremost...cost what it may. |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 29, 2014 13:40:42 GMT -5
dmmichgood, your words are in quotations here...
“You know I don't really feel much like answering your questions, when you don't answer the main question that I challenged you to answer: I challenge you and anyone to say where Jesus ever even mentioned homosexuality.”
I already answered your question, dmmichgood, at the very least, once – but I think twice. It might be that you didn’t read my answers, or you skimmed them, or you read them but refuse to believe and accept my proofs. Perhaps when you meet the Lord someday, you might ask him yourself, if you won’t believe anyone else. Yes, I know you don't believe, but maybe you will change your mind someday, when you have proof positive.
Luke 16:31, “"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'" - Jesus I also proved that Moses and Ezekiel both mention homosexuality in the context of Sodom, proving that the “gaychristian 101” website - whose text you copied and pasted - simply lied about that point.
But I am going on to prove the rest of their points. They might actually have one or two which are accurate, but I tend to doubt it. But if they do, I will find it and I will acknowledge it. If they don’t, I’ll continue exposing the rest of their lies, as well.
"I already answered your question, dmmichgood, at the very least, once – but I think twice. It might be that you didn’t read my answers, or you skimmed them, or you read them but refuse to believe and accept my proofs. "
No, you haven't answered my question!
I have read your answers, not just "skimmed them," and I do refuse to believe them and I don't accept your (supposed) proofs!
Because they aren't proofs.
You have never ever given any words that Jesus ever said anything about homosexuality. You and others only quote verses that belong to other people and assume on that basis that Jesus said them.
He didn't say those verses and until you can give words in the New Testament where Jesus actually said anything at all pertaining to the subject of homosexuality, you can continue to quote all over the bible and I won't believe you and I won't accept your (supposed) proofs!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2014 13:45:05 GMT -5
i think we have gone in a circle...
|
|
|
|
Post by hangingout on Mar 29, 2014 13:47:13 GMT -5
You can continue to quote all over the bible and I won't believe you and I won't accept your (supposed) proofs!
I know that.
You are free to not accept the Bible. (I really didn't expect you to, given that most of your posts are about how you don't. I mean, I get the idea!) 
But whether you accept the words or not doesn't change their validity one iota.
|
|
|
|
Post by faune on Mar 29, 2014 13:59:10 GMT -5
How do you know that your comparison of scripture and "revelation" that you have is the true one if your fellow Christian has a different "revelation?"
because of 4000+ years of consistent biblical standards Wally ~ Earlier in my postings I emphasized the need to consider scripture in the light of the context it is written and the historical back-drop to get a clearer picture and understanding of its meaning. By using deductive Bible study methods we can also gain some insights into the reason behind certain ordinances instituted in worship found within early Christian beliefs. The subject of long hair being given as a covering for women in demonstration of their submission to men or their own husbands was one such illustration.
In conclusion, the Ten Commandments also has a history connected to them, which is very interesting to review here, IMO? Since you use the O.T. Jewish law to justify your point of view regarding homosexuality, perhaps it would be helpful to discover how changes were made over the years to these teachings by different scribes and Early Church Fathers to reflect their own point of view in their presented Bible translations? Here's an article from Wiki which deals with this fact, which I feel makes it hard to consider the Bible as being "completely inerrant" in light of the different copying errors and even mistranslations along the way?
Therefore, I feel there's room to debate this issue of the inerrancy of scripture based upon how it was passed down, copied, and changed over the years by different groups to reflect their own point of view. Even the Early Church Fathers admitted to their preconceived right to make any changes they deemed as necessary in their copying and translation of scripture. As a result, I feel there is "wiggle room" to question certain verses regarding homosexuality found both in the O.T. and N.T. due to this known fact? If I failed to make myself clear along these lines before, I hope this helps to clarify my thoughts better? If you check out towards the bottom of this article, you will see what I mean about the different groups who made changes to the Ten Commandment account over the years and will also see the changes that they actually made along the way.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 29, 2014 14:08:16 GMT -5
dmmichgood, your words are in quotations here...
Perhaps when you meet the Lord someday, you might ask him yourself, if you won’t believe anyone else. Yes, I know you don't believe, but maybe you will change your mind someday, when you have proof positive.
Luke 16:31, “"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'" - Jesus I also proved that Moses and Ezekiel both mention homosexuality in the context of Sodom, proving that the “gaychristian 101” website - whose text you copied and pasted - simply lied about that point.
But I am going on to prove the rest of their points. They might actually have one or two which are accurate, but I tend to doubt it. But if they do, I will find it and I will acknowledge it. If they don’t, I’ll continue exposing the rest of their lies, as well.
"Perhaps when you meet the Lord someday, you might ask him yourself, if you won’t believe anyone else. Yes, I know you don't believe, but maybe you will change your mind someday, when you have proof positive"
Some Christians still try to use such a comment as this, attacking the person, which has nothing what-so-ever to do with the subject, in an attempt as proof.
Your reference:
Luke 16:31, “"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'" - Jesus
Amazing you quote Jesus but NOT on the subject that we are discussing!
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 29, 2014 14:18:30 GMT -5
You can continue to quote all over the bible and I won't believe you and I won't accept your (supposed) proofs!
I know that.
You are free to not accept the Bible. (I really didn't expect you to, given that most of your posts are about how you don't. I mean, I get the idea!)
But whether you accept the words or not doesn't change their validity one iota.
I am using the very bible that you believe in. I simply don't accept your (supposed) proofs!
The idea is for you to present any reference that Jesus DIRECTLY commented on homosexuality.
Instead you move all around the subject but can't provide any proof in Jesus own words. |
|
|
|
Post by hangingout on Mar 29, 2014 14:21:57 GMT -5
I read the article in Wikipedia that you posted, and based on that, can find no fundamental changes to the Ten Commandments as we know them today. There were some changes to the order in which they appear but other than that, they are all there, and all the same, basically. That different men of letters have made different observations and have different theories as to their dates and origins can be found in just about any field of study.
How accurate is the Bible?
bible.org/article/how-accurate-bible
|
|
|
|
Post by hangingout on Mar 29, 2014 14:45:30 GMT -5
I am using the very bible that you believe in. I simply don't accept your (supposed) proofs!
You refuse to use "the very Bible." I gave you the proof of Jesus' position on marriage (no surprise, he supports purity in heterosexual marriage), his position on the "law of Moses" regarding sexual immorality (which continues in the New Covenant, his words in the Book of Revelation, and the words of his apostles. You don't accept that because you want Jesus to say, "Hey, guys and gals, don't have sex with your same sex." You don't get it. He upheld the law. His position on Moses was very clear. Moses took down the words of the Lord. Jesus is the Lord! Jesus upheld only one kind of sexual union: marriage between a man and woman. Sexual immorality was defined clearly in both the OT and NT numerous times. You just don't want to believe it even when it's right in front of you. wally is right, this is only a circle.
So like I said, ask Him yourself when you see Him. You don't have to believe me, Moses, the prophets, the apostles, or the words of Jesus on what is marriage and what is sexual sin. It saddens me, but I believe your unbelief.
& I really don't see the point of repeating myself. You can magnify and bold your words and color them as blue as the night sky and paste them....over.....and over.....and over. What it proves to me that you are not a listener. You are a shouter.
After I finish what I have to do today (and probably tomorrow), I am going to take on another of the lies in the website which you promoted, "gaychristian 101"
One down, several more to go.........
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 29, 2014 14:52:37 GMT -5
Why not? Do you think God loves you for than a gay person? Do you feel justified in hating gays? hate the sin love the sinner...i love my lesbian cousin but i hate what she is doing...
It is nothing more than an attempt to make oneself appear a "loving Christian" while at the same time appearing "righteous!"
|
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 29, 2014 14:55:19 GMT -5
I am using the very bible that you believe in. I simply don't accept your (supposed) proofs!
You refuse to use "the very Bible." I gave you the proof of Jesus' position on marriage (no surprise, he supports purity in heterosexual marriage), his position on the "law of Moses" regarding sexual immorality (which continues in the New Covenant, his words in the Book of Revelation, and the words of his apostles. You don't accept that because you want Jesus to say, "Hey, guys and gals, don't have sex with your same sex." You don't get it. He upheld the law. His position on Moses was very clear. Moses took down the words of the Lord. Jesus is the Lord! Jesus upheld only one kind of sexual union: marriage between a man and woman. Sexual immorality was defined clearly in both the OT and NT numerous times. You just don't want to believe it even when it's right in front of you. wally is right, this is only a circle.
So like I said, ask Him yourself when you see Him. You don't have to believe me, Moses, the prophets, the apostles, or the words of Jesus on what is marriage and what is sexual sin. It saddens me, but I believe your unbelief.
& I really don't see the point of repeating myself. You can magnify and bold your words and color them as blue as the night sky and paste them....over.....and over.....and over. What it proves to me that you are not a listener. You are a shouter.
After I finish what I have to do today (and probably tomorrow), I am going to take on another of the lies in the website which you promoted, "gaychristian 101"
One down, several more to go.........
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2014 14:58:24 GMT -5
hate the sin love the sinner...i love my lesbian cousin but i hate what she is doing...
It is nothing more than an attempt to make oneself appear a "loving Christian" while at the other being "righteous!"
whether or not your tired of it doesn't matter its true.... |
|
I really enjoyed this "deductive Bible study tools" commentary on this subject, which helps you understand more clearly the meaning of Paul's word back in time by filling in on the customs existing within the first century. If you check out I Corinthians 11:5-16 in the Amplified Version below, I believe you will get a clearer understanding of Paul's exhortation within the context of scripture? 
There are many things written that pertained to the times back in history that are no longer viewed in the same light today ~ except for those who choose to hold to the inerrancy of scripture, regardless of the discrepancies and contradictions found throughout the Bible. I believe we must be realistic here and evaluate scriptural passages in light of the times they were written.
