It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Conspiracy To Twist Bible Verses To Suit Their Antigay Agenda - Romans 1:26-27

page: 9
9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 

It clearly states that homesexual sex is a sin. Here are just a few verses from the Bible regarding the subject of homosexuality.

2.Leviticus 20:13 (Whole Chapter)
“If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense.



Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 

If that is your point then I could see how you could interpret it that way, as the Bible is about loving one another, but it is also about actions that are considered sinful.


Umm ... what?

I cannot see how the Bible is all about loving one another when there's a blatant practice of discrimination and hate towards those who are homosexual by some of the Bible's followers.




posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 06:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Jomina
 


Oh, my! I have found a new YouTube channel thanks to you (:



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by pdpayne0418
 





Almost every single English translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 is crap. The word homosexual was not even used until the 19th century. How could a word that wasn't dreamed of until 1800 years after the original word in another language was written be a perfect translation? Arsenakatoi is the original word, and before the word "homosexual" was derived, was translated loosely as "temple prostitute." STOP reading the Bible as if it is modern literature


Saying any part of the bible is crap tells me something about a person. And that is they really have no interest in doing things God's way. That's fine too, but when you take it to the next level and slander scripture that becomes a little more serious, even more serious than the acts of Homosexuality itself.




You're not going to impress me by quoting from lexicons and dictionaries. Do me a favor, and go back to read translations of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 before the word "homosexual" was introduced into the English language. I think you missed my entire point. By the way, the entire last quote you posted seems to prove my point from my understanding of it - I simply think his last two sentences are unnecessary conclusions.

Peace,
Daniel

[edit on 25-7-2009 by pdpayne0418]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Zacaretas
 


A Christian is supposed to love everyone as themselves, but that does not mean that a Christian has to accept the actions of everyone as acceptable. As a matter of fact that is quite clearly pointed out in the bible:

2Ti 3:1-5 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

A Christian cannot judge a mans heart, but the church has the authority to judge a mans actions:

1 Co 5:1-13 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you. For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

Translation: unrepentant people are to be put out of the flock, excommunicated, until they show repentance and cease their sinful actions. Allowing them to remain in the flock puts the rest of the flock in danger of thinking that such actions are acceptable.

From Christ himself:

Mat 18:15 -18 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.


This power, granted in the last verse of the above quote, is know as the “Office of the Keys”:

What is the Office of the Keys?
The Office of the Keys is the special authority which Christ has given to His Church on earth: to forgive the sins of the penitent sinners, but to retain the sins of the impenitent as long as they do not repent.


[edit on 7/25/2009 by defcon5]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:06 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 



Hi defcon/
This is so true,sadly many believe otherwise!
Im not saying I am without SIN,we all sin in Gods eyes...I could be more of a sinner then the next person,but I understand my sin and try and deal with it according to the Lords Words....In His mercy, by Gods grace alone, I hope that He may forgive me.
It is not that I will save myself, but that Gods mercy will have pity on me and my soul at the last judgment!






When Thou shalt come, O righteous Judge, to execute just judgment, seated on Thy throne of glory,
a river of fire will draw all men amazed before Thy judgment-seat; the powers of heaven will stand beside Thee,
and in fear mankind will be judged according to the deeds that each has done.
Then spare us,
Christ,
in Thy compassion,
with faith we entreat Thee, and count us worthy of Thy blessings with those that are saved.
(Vesperal Sticheron from the Triodion)
O dread is that terrible day in which the just judgment of the Lord shall come.
Quick shall be its coming,
at a time unknown,
and quick shall be its might.
No ear shall be spared the trumpets' resounding call to the divine Tribunal, nor shall any earthly strength be fit to withstand it.

Behold there comes a day of the Lord almighty,
and who shall endure the fear of His presence?
For it is a day of wrath; the furnace shall burn,
and the Judge shall sit and give to each the due return for his works. (Exapostilarion from Matins)
Fear is an emotion oft mentioned in the services for this preparatory Sunday before the onset of the Great Fast: fear of the Last Judgment, fear of the divine justice of God, fear of the just punishment awaiting sinful man.


Sunday of the Last Judgement: Reflections on the Christian Fear of God ~written by M.C Steenburg ~in fear of GOD

ICXC NIKA
helen



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by pdpayne0418
 





Almost every single English translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 is crap. The word homosexual was not even used until the 19th century. How could a word that wasn't dreamed of until 1800 years after the original word in another language was written be a perfect translation? Arsenakatoi is the original word, and before the word "homosexual" was derived, was translated loosely as "temple prostitute." STOP reading the Bible as if it is modern literature


Saying any part of the bible is crap tells me something about a person. And that is they really have no interest in doing things God's way. That's fine too, but when you take it to the next level and slander scripture that becomes a little more serious, even more serious than the acts of Homosexuality itself.

Let's take a break from biblical/textual scholarship and revisit remedial English 101. Is the subject of my sentence "bible" or "translation?" Translation, good. Subject = translation; verb = is; object = crap. So I did not call the Bible crap.

This makes me have to ask the question: would you consider the Living Bible equally infallible to the original Aramaic, Greek and Hebrew manuscripts? If so, explain to all of us how that makes an inking of sense.

Peace,
Daniel



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by pdpayne0418
Do me a favor, and go back to read translations of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 before the word "homosexual" was introduced into the English language.


just because "homosexual" is a relatively new word doesnt mean that not what "αρσενοκοιται" translates to.

αρσενοκοιται - a sodomite -- abuser of (that defile) self with mankind.

if that doesnt mean a man having sex with a man, then please praytell what does it mean?



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:21 AM
link   
It never ceases to amaze me on threads like this how the herd continues to moo in abeyance to their supreme religious leaders instead of dealing with the linguistic and cultural issues of biblical interpretation. In all other areas of life, judging from their membership on a forum such as this, they most likely challenge the status quo. Yet, in matters of faith, they keep their heads in the sand and repeat the sad, fearful mantras of homophobia. Those of us not blinded by the religious dogmas of the world have to step back and ask ourselves why? Why don't they deal with the issues instead of droning on so robotically? I'd be happy to discuss the issues with those who disagree, but the only Christian on this thread who has even attempted to address the issues surrounding the translation of the Greek arsenakatoi into English seemed to miss my point centering on the introduction of "homosexual" into the English language.

Peace,
Daniel



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566

Originally posted by pdpayne0418
Do me a favor, and go back to read translations of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 before the word "homosexual" was introduced into the English language.


just because "homosexual" is a relatively new word doesnt mean that not what "αρσενοκοιται" translates to.

αρσενοκοιται - a sodomite -- abuser of (that defile) self with mankind.

if that doesnt mean a man having sex with a man, then please praytell what does it mean?


It means "abuser of self with mankind." See how awkward that very literal translation is? Now, praytell, why in the world would you take something so awkward and use the volatile, politically charged word "homosexual" as a translation - unless there was some agenda to be furthered? Why not just retain the word "sodomite," which in its old English form is purposefully vague?

Peace,
Daniel



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:37 AM
link   
One more thing before I head out to the 2009 Gay Pride Parade in Halifax, Nova Scotia- assume if I do not pick up this conversation later, God struck me dead for me flaming queerness.

Homosexual is not the only word in modern translations of questionable value. The word "virgin" in the modern translations of the virgin birth story in the gospels originally meant "young woman" in Hebrew. This is just another example of how modern (mostly conservative) Bible translators use English words that may or may not be the meaning of the original words.

May or may not is the crux of the issue. The modern institution of Christian homophobia is based on probability. Perhaps arsenakatoi means guys that have sex with each other. Perhaps is does not. Excluding between 5 - 10% of the entire human population from the Kingdom of Heaven is a weighty gamble.

Peace,
Daniel



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by pdpayne0418
 


Hi pdpayne/

The Greek Septuagint (Old Testament) has been around alot longer then the TRANSLATED versions of the later falsified Bibles.
The actual Greek word is as it is written.
It HAS NOT been changed!
Blue_jay33 has the Greek correct!



13 καὶ ὃς ἂν κοιμηθῇ μετά ἄρσενος κοίτην γυναικός,
βδέλυγμα ἐποίησαν ἀμφότεροι· θανάτῳ θανατούσθωσαν,
ἔνοχοί εἰσιν.
English Translation
13 And whoever shall lie with a male as with a woman,
they have both wrought abomination; let them die the death,
they are guilty.
Levi:20,13
Septuagint


The Old Testament laws applied to those times...God and man was not YET united because man had yet to see the Messiah prophesied.
When Christ came,crucified and Resurrected,he DESTROYED DEATH which was the CURSE that God gave to Adam and Eve for breaking the commandment.
DEATH was a physical and spiritual one because man was meant to live forever,but because of SIN entering into the FIRST MAN,Sin entered into all generations thereafter!
The only Sin that was passed on from Adam was DEATH of the physical body,not his own personal sins as some teach.
So, when each and everyone of us committs sin,we sin because we have free will...we are told of the consequences, but who will listen?
It is always easier to do bad then good....
This is why a Christians life is also called a STRUGGLE...to struggle is to understand what means coming closer to God.
Through STRUGGLE one also begins to understand their weaknesses and with humilty seeks what the Soul thirsts for.

ICXC NIKA
helen



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by pdpayne0418
 

From what I have found, it does not mean that:


Corinthians 6:
9. ουτε πορνοι ουτε ειδωλολατραι ουτε μοιχοι ουτε *μαλακοι* ουτε *αρσενοκοιται*
10. ουτε κλεπται ουτε πλεονεκται , ου μεθυσοι , ου λοιδοροι , ουχ αρπαγες βασιλειαν θεου κληρονομησουσιν .

9. N(either) prostitutes, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor *soft ones*, nor *male-liers*,
10. nor thieves, nor enviers, nor drunkers, nor slanderers, nor seizers will inherit (the) Kingodm of God.

Notice, there are a number of "crimes" ranging from the more punishable "idolaters" to the less punishable "enviers".

The two Greek words in question are *soft ones* μαλακοι and *male-liers* αρσενοκοιται.

Obviously, the Greek word that literally means *soft ones* has the same meaning that it does elsewhere when Greek uses it to describe to people.

The Greek meaning is very similar to the English sense of, "He's gone soft," or lost his toughness. It has connotations of being irresponsible and living a cushy pampered life. Essencially, *soft ones* means 'lazy ones'.

The next word *male-liers* refers to a very specific idolatrous ritual. This Greek word is a direct translation of the Hebrew technical term 'lier of a male' שוכב זכר. It refers to the verse in Leviticus that says,

Leviticus 18.22
> You will not lie with a male as a woman. It is an 'idolatrous-ritual' תועבה.

In Leviticus, the verse refers to the ancient Canaanite pagan ritual where a 'male' becomes a sacred prostitute. He goes to the temple of the fertility goddess Astarte, and 'spiritually' becomes this goddess.

He dresses up in women's clothes and 'lies down' AS A 'WOMAN' somewhere near the temple. He then has [snip] sex with another man who gives him money. The man giving money is 'spiritually' giving the money to the goddess. In return he hopes that the goddess will bless him with a fertile wife and many children. Now the man who became "as a woman" takes the money and gives it to the priests of the temple as a votive offering to the goddess. The sacred prostitute hopes that in return the goddess will grant him some favor. The Hebrew technical term for this "male-as-woman" sacred prostitute is a kadesh קדש, literally meaning a 'holy one'.


So in this instance it is a reference to both a homosexual act, and idolatry.



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by TheColdDragon
 





I'm betting the bible burns just as well as my firewood, and also that it lacks any magical blue smoke like computers have.



You know what, I have run into you on other threads, I know your type, There will come a day that you will curse God, because he absolutely proves to you that he exists and his bible was/is true, but you will be cursing in absolute defiance when you are forced to acknowledge his existence.

Why? Because an epiphany will hit you like a ton of bricks as to what that means for you, and your going to be very angry.

I feel so sorry for you. Let's hear what that bible has to say about it.

Ezekiel 18:23 (GOD'S WORD®)

I don't want wicked people to die." declares the Almighty LORD. "I want them to turn from their evil ways and live.


And if they don't then....

Ezekiel 25:16

17And I will execute great vengeance upon them with wrathful rebukes and chastisements, and they shall know (understand and realize) that I am the Lord, when I lay My vengeance upon them.



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by pdpayne0418
 





You're not going to impress me by quoting from lexicons and dictionaries. Do me a favor, and go back to read translations of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 before the word "homosexual" was introduced into the English language. I think you missed my entire point. By the way, the entire last quote you posted seems to prove my point from my understanding of it - I simply think his last two sentences are unnecessary conclusions. Peace, Daniel


I wasn't trying to impress you, I was proving to all the readers of this thread that you are wrong in your understanding of Greek which several other posters have now verified and added to. I stand by what I posted and by Strong's definition.

Your basically saying Strong's is wrong and your right, I will let the readers of this thread decide who to believe on that one. Because so far you have offered zero proof to back up your claim.



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by pdpayne0418
Hi pdpayne,

I just wanted to say, WOW.

Your responses remind me of John Matrix's responses regarding whether or not it's fornication or adultery if the married couple agree to share themselves with other people outside the marriage.

Before you ever made the statement that you were going to the Gay Pride parade (or was that a joke) I figured you were homosexual, because of the statements you were making.

John Matrix was adamant that homosexuality was wrong, yet he was also pretty adamant that it wasn't a sin to have sex with someone outside the marriage vows, if both parties in the marriage know and agree.

At one time, I thought it was ok for people to live together outside of marriage, if they *loved* each other, and were *committed* to each other.

You see, whatever a particular person's *bent* is, they grasp at straws to convince themselves that their case is different, and surely God didn't mean their situation. We can lie to ourselves very easily to justify doing what WE want, and not what God wants.

After I started reading the Bible and studying different writings about it, I found that God doesn't say, *this is wrong*, but it's ok under certain circumstances. Like, sex without marriage is fornication, but hey, if you love each other, it's OK then..........no, that doesn't cut it in God's eyes.

You say you are a divinity student (?) or seminarian, are these arguments you are putting forward something your teachers agree with?

God Bless
 



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by sezsue
 

Hi sezsue/

Yes, people will justify their OWN knowledge and Not Gods.
The Old Testament in the Psalm of David..a very good example of King Davids remorse and lamentations to the Lord.
This Psalm teaches us that Gods mercy is always patient and loving...in humility God sees and speaks to each of us...if we let Him.
PSALM 50


1 [For the end, a Psalm of David, when Nathan the prophet came to him, when he had gone to Bersabee.]
Have mercy upon me, O God,
according to thy great mercy; and according to the multitude of thy compassions blot out my transgression.
2 Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.
3 For I am conscious of mine iniquity; and my sin is continually before me. 4 Against thee only have I sinned,
and done evil before thee: that thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
5 For, behold, I was conceived in iniquities,
and in sins did my mother conceive me.
6 For, behold, thou lovest truth: thou hast manifested to me the secret and hidden things of thy wisdom.
7 Thou shalt sprinkle me with hyssop,
and I shall be purified: thou shalt wash me,
and I shall be made whiter than snow.
8 Thou shalt cause me to hear gladness and joy:
the afflicted bones shall rejoice.
9 Turn away thy face from my sins,
and blot out all mine iniquities.
The rest of this great psalm~Psalm 50David


ICXC NIKA
helen



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
reply to post by Totakeke
 


There's no way you could convince anyone with any degree or inkling of Linguistics that the bible is the infallible word of god in every translated version of it...

BECAUSE IT'S SMEGGING IMPOSSIBLE.


Hi, TheColdDragon,

I was curious. How do you know? Is it because YOU are a linguistic expert?

No one has any excuse to just assume anything now days, because we have the internet to be able to do some research.

In Daniel, it says in the time of the end, knowledge will be greatly increased, and implies the future generation at that time will be able to find out what Daniel was told was closed to him.

Can we just take the first piece of information that supports our views though? NO!!!

If I go to Richard Dawkins website, of course THERE, I will find out that the Bible has been thoroughly corrupted. But he is an atheist, so he has an agenda. He wants to bring people over to his point of view. I read what he has to say, though, because I want to be exposed to both sides.

HOWEVER, there is plenty of documentation that states that, except for a few words here and there, the ancient documents and current Bibles are practically the same.

The following article is refuting the LDS church's stance on the Bible. I have no agenda against the LDS church in referencing this article. This was just one of many I could have used, and was one of the first in the list.





ACCURACY OF OUR COPIES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT

Strict regulations were enforced in the copying of Old Testament scriptures. An authentic specimen had to be used, and copyists weren't allowed to deviate from it in any way. Nothing was permitted to be written down from memory, not even a dot. If any mistakes were made, the faulty copies were either burned or buried, as was every document that showed any sign of wear. Many other precautions were also taken, some even more elaborate than these, such as the counting of every letter on each page. So it's unlikely that errors would have crept into the copying of the Old Testament.

It doesn't make sense to imagine for one moment that people who were so fanatically fastidious about the accuracy of their scriptures, and so in awe of them, would adulterate them or hack out great big portions of them. Nor would they permit others to do so. Those Jewish folk guarded their scriptures jealously and reverentially. Don't forget that the primitive church was completely Jewish, and a large number of the early church consisted of converted Jews, all of whom had this very same reverence for scripture.

In 1947 an Arab shepherd boy discovered a vast quantity of ancient manuscripts in some caves, which became known as the Dead Sea Scrolls. They pre-dated anything we'd previously possessed, and included portions of every Old Testament book except Esther. Many of the scrolls were in fragments, but those they have pieced together agree with our modern Bibles.





ACCURACY OF OUR COPIES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

As we've learned more about ancient biblical languages we have been able to translate them more precisely. But this hasn't changed the actual meaning of the content in any way.

We possess more than 3,000 New Testament manuscripts dating from the fourth century. A few of these have minor variations. However, as most of them do agree, it's an easy matter to sort out which are the reliable texts.

Some copies of John's writings dating from 200 AD have come to light. They agree with our Bibles. We also have the writings of the apostolic fathers and the church fathers. (The apostolic fathers were the disciples of the apostles, and the church fathers were the disciples of the apostolic fathers.) Their combined writings contain the entire New Testament, except sixteen verses, which are only the introductions to the epistles. And their versions of the New Testament scriptures agree with our modern translations. Furthermore, besides these, there were literally thousands of other early Christian writings citing verses from the Bible, that agree with our Bibles of today. So we can rest assured that our modern New Testament is in line with the original writings.


In real terms, the New Testament is easily the best attested ancient writing in terms of the sheer number of documents, the time span between the events and the document, and the variety of documents available to sustain or contradict it. There is nothing in ancient manuscript evidence to match such textual availability and integrity (Ravi K. Zacharias, page 162, "Can Man Live Without God? " Word Publishing, 1994.)


Luke wrote two books, his gospel and the book of Acts. Because he never mentioned either the destruction of Jerusalem that occurred in 70 A.D.or the apostle Paul's execution, these books must have been written some time after the imprisonment of Paul but prior to his appearing before Nero. This dates them within thirty years of Christ's ministry. And in their book "Eyewitness to Jesus," German and British scholars Drs. Carsten Theide and Matthew D'Ancona refer to a fragment from the Gospel of Matthew, that scientific evidence revealed was also written before AD 70, possibly as early as AD 30. This means that these three books, and probably all the others too, were written and circulated during the lifetime of the eyewitnesses to the events recorded. So they would have been able to vouch for their accuracy.

Because of the overwhelming evidence available, it is unlikely that errors could have crept into our versions of either the Old or New Testaments.


Is the Bible corrupted?

God Bless

[edit on 25-7-2009 by sezsue]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by helen670

The Old Testament laws applied to those times...God and man was not YET united because man had yet to see the Messiah prophesied.
When Christ came,crucified and Resurrected,he DESTROYED DEATH which was the CURSE that God gave to Adam and Eve for breaking the commandment.
DEATH was a physical and spiritual one because man was meant to live forever,but because of SIN entering into the FIRST MAN,Sin entered into all generations thereafter!
The only Sin that was passed on from Adam was DEATH of the physical body,not his own personal sins as some teach.
So, when each and everyone of us committs sin,we sin because we have free will...we are told of the consequences, but who will listen?
It is always easier to do bad then good....
This is why a Christians life is also called a STRUGGLE...to struggle is to understand what means coming closer to God.
Through STRUGGLE one also begins to understand their weaknesses and with humilty seeks what the Soul thirsts for.

ICXC NIKA
helen


This is just crap ...............read this.............

Matt 5:17


17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.


The commandments were not for the "old" days............



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   
The Bible is not twisted. Why not point to the scripture where God encourages homosexuality?



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by heliosprime
 


Ok, let's try again!
(sorry,talking to the computer)

Hi/
The Old Testamnet Prophets spoke of a coming Messiah,A SAVIOUR who would fullfill the LAWS of the Old...

He fullfilled that He as God took FLESH and became MAN.
The ten commandments still stand...
When He was asked by His followers, He said LOVE is all the LAW stands on.
Those that LOVE Him do as He taught them.
Those that do otherwise, are against His WORD.

Fullfill He did!
His Birth as it was foretold.
Crucified as it was foretold.
Resurected as it was Foretold.
All was fullfilled by Him....
Who was it that saught to kill Him and why?
All was known to Him....this was also foretold by the Old Testament Prophets.
For this reason did God take Flesh and became Man...DEATH was no longer a curse to man!

ICXC NIKA
helen



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join