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.

 

Christian preacher arrested for saying homosexuality is a sin

page: 14
40
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by RestingInPieces
 


People have a right to chose education or not. It doesn't matter if you think it holds people back. Many things hold people back mentally and physically, and likewise you have no right to enforce or destroy those things either.

The fact is this. Society is free. You can say what you want. Unless you go and yell fire in a theater and cause a stampede, you are free to still say what you want. Viewing homosexuality as wrong is just as much as viewing ADD as wrong. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks. Words are free to be expressed until it causes physical harm. Even then, you charge the specific people, you do not ban it from ever being said again. More people died from the words on the declaration of independence then I care to think. It too is not banned.


Conclusion: live with it.




posted on May, 3 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 







I know what I believe and I am confident of it. Don't tell me I can't decide what to believe; that's another lie.


I intended to imply that xtinity as a group cannot agree on what it believes, I did not lie I failed to communicate correctly, not unlike the yahwhe
jesus god.

But I can read a book the same as you my friend so get off your high horse





You clearly don't understand it, but then again you couldn't really fully understand it without being a Christian anyway.


How do you know whether or not I understand what the bibles say who exactly made you the authority ?

If I can't understand a bible without being an xtian then this would imply that I can be an xtian without understanding a bible. If I can be an xtian without understanding a bible this would make a bible redundant and surplus to requirements. Hm, kind of killed your own argument there my friend





I have not done such a thing merely presented the facts, which are -





You've lied and slandered christians out of your bigotry.


Your bibles clearly say that men who sleep with other men are committing a sin which is an abomination and clearly says that for committing this crime they should be put to death.

Do the bibles not give this instruction ? Did it not mean what it says ?

Did jesusyahwhe not say this - How exactly am I lying by quoting your god ?


It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." Luke 16:17












You don't understand the bible, you don't understand the price paid by Christ because you don't believe in it in the first place, stop trying to pretend like you know what you're talking about. It's the height of arrogance to project your incorrect interpretation of the Bible onto Christians and then use that against us as an excuse to hate us and seek our prosecution for stating our beliefs.



I do know what I'm talking about thanks very much , you're god gave strict instructions to death (amongst many) men who sleep with men as they would a women.

Your god did not change his mind about this because according to your instruction manual written by him (or by men but inspired by him xtians can't seem to agree on that one) he does not change his mind.

Your god (when he comes to earth as a man again) makes it quite clear that not a word of his laws have been changed.





You don't understand what the "instruction manual" says in the first place. I believe it 100%, but it's not your place to assume what that means out of your own ignorance.



So, once again, who exactly made you the authority on the meaning of the scriptures ?

because you give yourself the label of "Christian" this automatically makes it possible for you to read a statement that "the law shall not be changed" and somehow make it change but not change ?

Children read bibles and it is clear to them that yahwh jesus instructed the practitioners of homosexuality to be killed, it is also clear that the same invisible man in the sky also said the law shall not be changed.

Which part of a man living inside the belly of a fish don't they understand ?



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by GorehoundLarry
 





But at least (some) Christians are peaceful about it. Try being openly gay in Iran without being executed. It's tough.


But if xtians had their way again, how long before their pockets of extremists start demanding gays be executed or witches burned.

The only difference between xtianity and Islam is so many xtians seem to not actually believe what they preach.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by piedsniper
reply to post by DaMod
 





What part of "on topic" do you not understand?

And how the hell is discussing homosexuality and the bibles not on the same topic as " Christian preacher arrested for saying homosexuality is a sin" may I ask ?


It wouldn't be if that was all you where discussing. You just barely got back on topic dude.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by piedsniper
 


Maybe you haven;t observed the human race much, but unity is a lie. individuality = no consensus. Things are just set by core beliefs, then do whatever you want. In this sense, religion is clear. Christians believe the Abraham God sent a messiah named Jesus to save men from sin. Muslims believe that Jesus is one in a long line of men from God, muhomod being the last, and jews still wait for the messiah.

This is universal for those of that term in each religion.

The fact tat there is not a consensus in bigger issues is simply not important.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by GorehoundLarry
 


I make choices for myself. Sure I beleive in god, that he is love. Even an athiest can see the logic in "Love thy neighbor as thy self".

And I do


Indeed, very valid point


2nd line.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by piedsniper
 


We're meant to follow the new testament....argument over. Jesus wasn't for murder of anybody just to forgive people of their sins........i can't wait to read your response.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Intuitiveaptitude2009
 





We're meant to follow the new testament....

My apologies, I was unaware that your'e bible does not contain the old testament






Jesus wasn't for murder of anybody just to forgive people of their sins........i can't wait to read your response.


I did not imply that jesus was for murder I merely pointed out that the bible god jesusyawhweh (obviously if you don't follow the old testament Yahweh doesn't apply and jesus is a different god) clearly instructs killing. Let's not forget jesus was quite partial to a bit of slavery.



But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.


Yes I know what you'll respond with, "oh that's a parable you silly ignorant atheist " Indeed it could well be read as part of the parable, but even so the parable was in reference to himself. Accept jesus as your king or be killed.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 07:19 PM
link   
i cant believe people like this exist



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by piedsniper
 


Cause it is a parable.

21For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.

22And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:

23Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?

24And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.

25(And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)

26For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.

27But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.



IE, if you worship the one gift, rather than go out and give it, you are worthy of death, for you did nothing useful in your life. You sat fat and lazy.

yea, you kind of are worthy of death.

Doesn't say to do it, it says that's what happens to those who go down that path.

So yea.

Not related to killing nonbelievers. Good try.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 08:00 PM
link   
this is completely out of control, does this mean were having the thought police enter civilization???



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Cobra.EXE
 


Well, according to many posts in this thread that is exactly what people want. Just read. You will see.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by RestingInPieces
 


People have a right to chose education or not. It doesn't matter if you think it holds people back. Many things hold people back mentally and physically, and likewise you have no right to enforce or destroy those things either.

The fact is this. Society is free. You can say what you want. Unless you go and yell fire in a theater and cause a stampede, you are free to still say what you want. Viewing homosexuality as wrong is just as much as viewing ADD as wrong. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks. Words are free to be expressed until it causes physical harm. Even then, you charge the specific people, you do not ban it from ever being said again. More people died from the words on the declaration of independence then I care to think. It too is not banned.

Conclusion: live with it.


Wow, what a fanciful description of your personal fantasy land!!!!!!!!!!

Of course, if you were correct then this story wouldn't exist. Neither would compulsory education and myriad of other things that you are intentionally blocking out in order to attempt to align your crazy-whacko-land fantasy with reality.

[snip]

 


Removed personal attack


[edit on 3/5/10 by masqua]



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I repeat... please STOP with the personal attacks in this thread.

2nd warning



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by masqua
 


These heated topics always brings out the worst in us.
But,I am afraid the future of free speech is nearing an
end.I see the writing on the wall.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Ladies and gentlemen.

Whether the idea of man on man in the bible exists or not is simply not important because in the end, this is a thread about free speech. There are people who are not Christian that believe homosexuality to be wrong so lets not let this descend into a religious debate.

The point of this thread is to question the right of a person to announce their views in a public forum.

My personal opinion is that free speech allows anyone to shout their views from the rooftops as long as they do not hurt anyone or incite violence, and as long as they own the rooftop of course
The essence of free speech is that you may well hear things that upset you, that offend you, that annoy or anger you. The sad part of this situation is that once someones opinion upset others the individual involved was shut down.

Now let me be clear, i do not dislike homosexuals, their lifestyle doesn't upset me, it doesn't anger me, i find their lifestyle completely acceptable.


However at the same time i must support the right of others to criticise free speech, if i do anything else i am a hypocrite. If i say that the gay people must be allowed their rights but i trample the rights of those who dislike gay people then i am a hypocrite and i refuse to be that person.


Basically i say you can do whatever you like as long as it is consenting and legal. If it is these two things then i very much doubt you will offend me.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by asturel13

"""The Bible speaks of the relationship between man and God, not dinosaurs. The Bible need not describe all the life forms God made, just that He made them. There is no talk of micro organisms either, but the average person would know that life, all of it was created by God. The Earth is over 4.5 billion years old. God could have created many species before man was created."""

But the bible is still full of false accounts such as the world being flat and that unicorns are real. Science has proven the bible to be a work of fiction and no amount of arguing is going to change the facts.

[edit on 3-5-2010 by asturel13]

[edit on 3-5-2010 by asturel13]


The Bible is only full of false accounts to the people who believe such things. The Bible is quite accurate in what it states. Science if fact confirms the Bible.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jay-morris

Originally posted by mamabeth
reply to post by Jay-morris
 


You are so wrong!
Dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible...
I have a dvd of a sermon concerning the proof
of dinosaurs in the Bible.
Try looking up the CREATION museum!


Lol the bible does not metion dinosaurs. Are you talking about Behemoth and Leviathan ? I bet you are lol hippopotamus and crocodile comes to mind
Again, its just people reading what they want to read, its as simple as that.


Okay one you are ignorant to anything scripture related so you shouldn't even respond. To do you a favor I'll show you how it's NOT a hippopotamus.

Animal Height (m) Length (m) Weight (kg)
Hippopotamus 1.5 3-4 2,000
Elephant 3.5 6 7,000
Diplodocus 16.5 42 55,000

Here is the passages describing your so called "hippopotamus" (lol, ah good laugh) from the book of Job 40: 15-24:
15 Behold now the behemoth that I have made with you; he eats grass like cattle.
16 Behold now his strength is in his loins and his power is in the navel of his belly.
17 His tail hardens like a cedar; the sinews of his tendons are knit together.
18 His limbs are as strong as copper, his bones as a load of iron.
19 His is the first of God's ways; [only] his Maker can draw His sword [against him].
20 For the mountains bear food for him, and all the beasts of the field play there.
21 Does he lie under the shadows, in the cover of the reeds and the swamp?
22 Do the shadows cover him as his shadow? Do the willows of the brook surround him?
23 Behold, he plunders the river, and [he] does not harden; he trusts that he will draw the Jordan into his mouth.
24 With His eyes He will take him; with snares He will puncture his nostrils.

From those words right there it's obvious it's not a hippo but to prove more it's not we'll go further.
15 - He is an herbivore; that is easy to see.
16 - The word loins is mothen, which is the waist or the small of the back. The word rendered "navel" derives from the Hebrew term sharir. Scholars have suggested that the term originally meant "firm, hard," hence, denoted "the firm parts of the belly". Therefore this animal is described as a very strong animal with a muscular belly. In other words, it was very powerful in the mid-section of its body. This description does not fit the elephant whose strength is in his neck, head, and tusks, not in his “belly.” In fact, he is most vulnerable in the abdominal region.7 The sauropod dinosaur with its very large mid-section stands out as the most likely of the candidates to fit this description. The strength of crocodiles does not emanate from their "loins."
17 - What land creatures do we know of today that have tails the size of a cedar tree? The elephant's tail is like that of the hog, whilst the hippopotamus tail is a little 6-8 inch stubby appendage. The only creatures known to us today that had tails as big as a cedar tree were the largest of the known dinosaurs. Another clue is that the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 - The word "bones" is translated from "etsem", which means the body, substance. "Strong pieces" is translated from "aqhiyq", which means, containing. The word "aqhiyq" has a play on a riverbed or valley of a stream, in the sense that the riverbed is strong to hold the river. The body of this creature is a strong as brass, and would need to be if it were as big as a dinosaur. The second time "bones" is used it is "gerem", which is the skeleton. The skeletal structure of this large beast is as strong as bars of iron. Only a very large animal would need these strong bones to support its sheer bulk. Crocodiles don't have bones like iron bars.
21 - A certain habit of the behemoth was lying under the shady trees concealed by the reeds and fens. The shady trees is a translation of se'elim, believed to be a kind of lotus. Reeds and fens are found in swampy areas. The behemoth was also apparently an aquatic animal. The elephant retreats to the depths of the forest during the hot part of the day, not marshy areas. The hippopotamus stays in the deeper water, whereas the behemoth stays under the trees on the bank. The hippopotamus inhabits the rivers of Africa and the lakes of Ethiopia and does not wander far from water. Crocodiles do not venture far from water. Dinosaurs also frequented water spots.

Anyone who denies this is being an idiot and denies the truth and doesn't know anything about what the Bible is saying.

[edit on 3-5-2010 by novastrike81]



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 09:47 PM
link   
That sounds like anything, not necessarily a dinosaur. The passage is vague, as is much of the biblical writings. We could be looking at a dinosaur, or a monster, or a dragon, or a space alien slug, or any number of fake mythical creatures.

Furthermore the fact that you have to make a backhanded insult to claim that anybody who disagrees with you is an idiot seems to suggest that you yourself really don't believe with as much certainty as you let on.



posted on May, 3 2010 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar
That sounds like anything, not necessarily a dinosaur. The passage is vague, as is much of the biblical writings. We could be looking at a dinosaur, or a monster, or a dragon, or a space alien slug, or any number of fake mythical creatures.

Furthermore the fact that you have to make a backhanded insult to claim that anybody who disagrees with you is an idiot seems to suggest that you yourself really don't believe with as much certainty as you let on.


Typical response to someone who doesn't want to believe the truth. It's even spelled out for you. Just because they are more poetic in the way they describe things doesn't make it vague. It means you aren't taking the time to read what is being said. You take things at face value. Maybe you should learn the language of the time it was written instead of the language which is written today.

[edit on 3-5-2010 by novastrike81]



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join