I Am a Straight, Married Christian Male in Support of Gay Marriage

page: 37
60
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 02:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Partisanity
The Bible comments are always of the poorest quality, it seems.

Perhaps people should read the book instead of listening to some enthusiastic preacher.

I very much hope that your wives were virgins before you married them.

Otherwise the Bible proves your marriage just as illegitimate as any homosexual marriage.

If they were not, then bring your wives out to be stoned.

It's the Levitican way.


I particularily enjoy how nonbelievers try to use the Bible against believers...kinda doesn't make too much sense.

I'll help you out...

#1 ) Homosexuality is a sin
#2) Adultery, Stealing, etc are all sins

#3) This is the big one: Believers ADMIT (ready...) ADMIT we are sinning. Homosexuals are trying to say it isn't a sin or that anyone that doesn't accept it is prehistoric and then the Bible is attacked.

So keep goin on, keep trying to believe that you are correct...but you aren't, sorry...




posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 02:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by RedGod

Originally posted by goodday123
reply to post by The Old American
 


No offence, but if you support homosexuality, then you can not be a true believer in Jesus Christ.
The Bible is as valid as it was then and God's word is unmoving.



Right. Like the biblical laws saying that priests shouldn't shave (Leviticus 21:5), that you can't eat pork or shellfish, that you can't wear shirts of two different kinds of material, don't let cattle graze with other kinds of cattle, don't have a variety of crops on the same field. (Leviticus 19:19, I believe), or the laws that support slavery (Leviticus 25:44-45)

There's more:

Any person who curses his mother or father, must be killed. (Leviticus 20:9)
If a man is caught raping a woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father, marry her, and never be allowed to divorce her. (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

It's okay, I'm not actually expecting you to respond, wouldn't want you to stumble and fall while you backpedal.


Tons from the OT - have you read any of the NT or just maybe you like to hang on a few old quotes so that you can still choose to not believe.

I'll start you on Lev 20:9..."The term יקלל yekallel signifies, not only to curse, but to speak of a person contemptuously and disrespectfully, to make light of; so that all speeches which have a tendency to lessen our parents in the eyes of others, or to render their judgment, piety, etc., suspected and contemptible, may be here included; though the act of cursing, or of treating the parent with injurious and opprobrious language, is that which is particularly intended"

Now I know your advanced intelligent mind will be able to understand the differences of cultures and time frames in our human history...the Bible is a lot of history and even in Davids case it doesn't hide...

Peace be to all believers and to those who are to come into the fold. Let us be strong in faith in the wake of the mocking laughter of nonbelievers....glorious will be the day!



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 06:22 AM
link   
Wow no offense but people who believe in god are going to be really surprised when in I'd say at least a year we'll contact other life



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amatoremsapeientiae
Wow no offense but people who believe in god are going to be really surprised when in I'd say at least a year we'll contact other life


how is that offensive to the church?



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by DRAZIW
 





God created "man" and created something called "freedom" for man.


So he created people with free will and freedom yet they still have fundamental chores they MUST perform or be punished for it? Please just place that way of thinking in another scenario.

Men travel and take men away from their homeland 100s or thousands of miles and do them a favour (which was never asked for) of helping them travel to this new country, they are then assigned chores and jobs which they must do or else they shall be severely punished.

Sounds a little like this: en.wikipedia.org...




Well he is bad for a time, because God made him that way.


So god made him 'bad', which he has no choice over, and is then punished for being 'bad' due to the free will which he never had.




This does happen from time to time. That is to say, God doesn't always allow man to choose.


Sounds like apologist talk. So he (arbitrarily?) doesn't let some people have what all the others do?




GOD puts new instructions into man's DNA,


I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. Where in the bible does it state DNA? If not then this is simply your own assumption. You are using a scientific discovery to attempt to siphon off some credence- that is an incredibly disingenuous comment.




No. God made you "free to be bad". But he didn't "make you bad."

So god would still be responsible then for introducing both the concept and activities which are 'bad'. Does somebody supplying a gun for a murder have no responsibility at all?


Finally, again you failed to answer the biggest point of my post.



I presume you will say something akin to "it is the things he tempts with which are bad" yet if people wouldn't have committed these sins without god then 1. it would be described as entrapment and 2. It is the devil (and god by proxy) who is bringing sin into the world. If he is the one who tempts people with the sins then it would surely be he is to be punished- else it is not really the 'sins' themselves which are 'bad' and it is all a, quite malevolent, sick and depraved, test to see who obeys god and who doesn't.


So would the sins occur without the devil tempting people? If so why does god 'employ' the devil? If not just an anthropomorphic metaphor so people can grasp and believe the story easier?
edit on 23-9-2011 by yes4141 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by goodday123
 


I agree, to anyone who doesn't believe in a deity then the bible has no more relevance than Harry Potter. It has powerful, vivid stories to scare and wow people which by then those characteristics are transplanted onto the god itself by association.

However, considering the bible is the way which modern christians to learn how they must behave, anyone can use the words of the bible to deduce what they consider christianity to be- whether it be real or fictional is irrelevant to this. The bible is supposedly the word of the christian/ abrahamic god therefore it all must surely possess equal value, I see nothing hypocritical whatsoever about an Atheist discussing what they believe being a christian entails as it remains simply the interpretation of the rulebook..



So keep goin on, keep trying to believe that you are correct...but you aren't, sorry...


urgh...forced, earnest arrogance as self- assurance.
edit on 23-9-2011 by yes4141 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by spw184
 


By the fact that it disproves the whole god made man in his own image B's therfore disproving god



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by yes4141

So he created people with free will and freedom yet they still have fundamental chores they MUST perform


Yes. Man must wake up. And man must sleep. Man must eat. And man must take a dump. There are lots of fundamental chores man must do. Why is that so hard to understand?



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 08:34 AM
link   



GOD puts new instructions into man's DNA,


I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. Where in the bible does it state DNA? If not then this is simply your own assumption. You are using a scientific discovery to attempt to siphon off some credence- that is an incredibly disingenuous comment.




Oh sorry, I forgot!!! Were still in the dark ages and science falls under the catagory of witchcraft!!!...

How could I forget....



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by DRAZIW
 


You stated that the devil has a job set by god. Therefore god assigns many people tasks which they must perform or else they are severely punished. I made an analogy. You completely ignored everything. Again you only answer one tiny segment of a post without context.

Congratulations on failing your Christian Apologist beginners class.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by spw184
 


I'm not sure if that was directed at me or not. You think it's fair to use scientific discovery which is not even close to being mentioned in this handbook to life to validate other things which are stated in this book? If it is the complete word of God then there is surely no reason/ right to use information learnt from other sources to ascribe the bible with credibility.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by yes4141
reply to post by DRAZIW
 


You stated that the devil has a job set by god. Therefore god assigns many people tasks which they must perform or else they are severely punished. I made an analogy. You completely ignored everything. Again you only answer one tiny segment of a post without context.


You cannot take the axiom "one individual must" and conclude "many individuals must".

Although it is true that God assigns individuals other than the devil specific roles and tasks, it doesn't "follow therefore" from the special role and task the devil has been given.

Other individuals do get tasks: e.g. Jesus got a major task.

Even ordinary men can get some special tasks also. Like,



And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. -- John 9:2 KJV



The ordinary blind man had a task to be available for the manifestation of a miracle to demonstrate the powers of god when he was subsequently healed, and thus get the people to "think".



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by yes4141
reply to post by spw184
 


I'm not sure if that was directed at me or not. You think it's fair to use scientific discovery which is not even close to being mentioned in this handbook to life to validate other things which are stated in this book? If it is the complete word of God then there is surely no reason/ right to use information learnt from other sources to ascribe the bible with credibility.


This book might change your mind:






The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground. So says the Holy Bible. And now, for the first time, this text presents a remarkable proof that the KJV is right....etc..


www.amazon.com



it seems the Bible also encodes the DNA genetic information if you know where to look !



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by DRAZIW
 


You claimed that god gives people free will to choose to be 'bad', yet at the same time have stated that many others do not have this choice as they have something to do for god. Therefore people are at the very least not created equal.




it seems the Bible also encodes the DNA genetic information if you know where to look !


Recently there was much criticism because a modern translation of the Qur'an stated that Allah had created man out of 'cells' rather than soil/ mud/ dirt etc. - would you not agree this is grossly disingenuous?
A similiar thing can be done with a loaded agenda to find more fact, and therefore credibility, from a a book 1400 - 1900 years old. I must question why these scientific meanings were not interpreted and therefore proclaimed prior to the scientific discovery. The simple "because now we know what they mean" is entirely void as this was supposedly a book 'from god' to explain and teach things to humanity- DNA would be as seemingly far fetched as anything else in the bible 2000 years ago yet this was not one of the things that 'faith' was encouraged in. Why then have faith in any of it if this was on purpose? It could all be claimed to be "something we shall understand in the future" and therefore entirely worthless now- as you are effectively claiming for DNA in the bible.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by yes4141
reply to post by DRAZIW
 


You claimed that god gives people free will to choose to be 'bad', yet at the same time have stated that many others do not have this choice as they have something to do for god. Therefore people are at the very least not created equal.



I don't know what you're looking for with your idea of "equal".

People are different, and certainly not the same. Everyone is unique. None of us are "eeual" to Jesus, for example.



I must question why these scientific meanings were not interpreted and therefore proclaimed prior to the scientific discovery. The simple "because now we know what they mean" is entirely void as this was supposedly a book 'from god' to explain and teach things to humanity- DNA would be as seemingly far fetched as anything else in the bible 2000 years ago yet this was not one of the things that 'faith' was encouraged in. Why then have faith in any of it if this was on purpose? It could all be claimed to be "something we shall understand in the future" and therefore entirely worthless now- as you are effectively claiming for DNA in the bible.


The bible is a "coded" book. It was never intended to be fully understood until the last days.



But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. -- Daniel 12:4 KJV



We see the bible clearly says "knowledge shall be increased". So that at the last days we will have enogh knowledge to "open the book" and understand the code. But, until then the book is "shut up" and "sealed" to those who don't yet have the knowledge to decode it.

That's the basic plan of the bible.

It's the same way that a "math book" is "sealed" to those who don't know any mathematics.

This is done, so that man would understand, when he gets all this knowledge, and is feeling proud of his achievements, that all this learning was already known before in the days of old by "someone".



The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us. -- Ecclesiastes 1:9-10 KJV



That's why the book is written and saved for the future generations. Man forgets, then remembers, then forgets, then remembers. It's a cycle.

edit on 24-9-2011 by DRAZIW because: spelling



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by DRAZIW
 


I'm talking about equality because you claimed that all people have the ability to choose whether to be 'good' or 'bad'! Yet if some have pretermined roles to play then they latently do not. Therefore some people cannot choose to sin or not.




The bible is a "coded" book. It was never intended to be fully understood until the last days.


So 1. Why do you claim to KNOW these things?
2. Why do you claim to KNOW what the bible means?
3. Why are you quoting the bible? If it cannot be understood until the 'last days' then you cannot claim to correctly interpret the words so the verses serve no purpose to back up your point.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by yes4141

I'm talking about equality because you claimed that all people have the ability to choose whether to be 'good' or 'bad'! Yet if some have pretermined roles to play then they latently do not. Therefore some people cannot choose to sin or not.



Well everybody is equal in some ways. We have two hands, ten fingers, etc...at least most people are equal in certain predetermined ways.

Some are different..even so...like people with twelve fingers:..like this guy..

thecaudallure.com... oes/

But that is rare.

Nevertheless, whatever the basis of "equal" we pick, we can always find some "exception" to the rule.

The point is, however, the exception is not the rule.

There is the rule for the many, and then there are a few special exceptions to be found.



So 1. Why do you claim to KNOW these things?


Because I understand some things in the bible.

Contrary to some opinions out there, the bible is not a completely obscure book. There are parts that everybody can understand. There are parts that many understand, but not all. There are parts that only few understand. And there are parts that nobody understands right now, and which only will be understood in the last days.




2. Why do you claim to KNOW what the bible means?


I only claim to know certain parts of the bible. Those are the parts that are "clear" to me.

There are still other verses in the bible that are "obscure" to me.




3. Why are you quoting the bible? If it cannot be understood until the 'last days' then you cannot claim to correctly interpret the words so the verses serve no purpose to back up your point.



Like I said, the entire book is not obscure. The bible has always been "partly understood". As time passed, more and more of the bible has become clear. At least to some people. Even so, others cannot understand because



Yet the LORD hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day. -- Deuteronomy 29:4 KJV



We do not expect everyone to understand.

At the time of Jesus, 2000 years ago, few people could accept the idea of "virgin birth". The Jews teased Jesus that he had more than one father, because they knew Joseph was not his biological father. But, today many people who have some scientific knowledge can understand how it is possible for a virgin to conceive and give birth to a child. Artificial insemination is routine practice for many women who have a difficult time conceiving naturally. Again, "knowledge has increased" and many people "can" see, and hear, and understand the words of the book. But those same people who understand today, would have disbelieved 2000 years ago.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by DRAZIW
 


Seriously, you bring up someone with 12 fingers to illustrate that people are different? Are you seriously not a troll?

You are still deflecting the discussion on the devil, but never mind....



The point is, however, the exception is not the rule. There is the rule for the many, and then there are a few special exceptions to be found.


So some people need not worry about doing harm to others or committing sins because their path is set- so they certainly do NOT have the free will which you acclaimed god made us 'all' have earlier.




Because I understand some things in the bible.


But the part you think you understand could only make sense in the future alongside a new discovery. Maybe there were people who were assured they knew what parts of the bible mean that we can only 'know' with modern knowledge. It is hardly modesty to claim you definitely know what the apparent word of god is to mean.

That is complete faith in yourself, not god.




But, today many people who have some scientific knowledge can understand how it is possible for a virgin to conceive and give birth to a child. Artificial insemination is routine practice for many women...


Yet Mary was apparently not impregnated by flesh but by a non-material being: therefore there would be no semen. Parthenogenesis is not something that scientists cannot "understand" how that could happen at all. You are claiming that apparently 'god's semen' was used to create Jesus and the angel Gabriel got a big syringe and injected it up her? Where does the bible say, or rather imply according to yourself, that it happened like this?



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by yes4141

Seriously, you bring up someone with 12 fingers to illustrate that people are different? Are you seriously not a troll?



I bring up someone with 12 fingers to show that you can always find "exceptions" to every commonly accepted rule. Not to show that everyone is different.

But the "exception" does not negate the rule.





You are still deflecting the discussion on the devil, but never mind....


Satan is an exceptional being. There is no one else like him.

The word "DEVIL", on the other hand, is often used more generally. When you reverse the letters of the word you get "LIVED". That's because a common "devil" is normally just the spirit of a person who once "lived" on earth as a man. After the man dies in this physical world, his soul enters the spirit world, which is the "reverse" side of our life here on earth, hence the "reversal of the letters." And because he was once a man, living a human life, he often still has interests in the human world, and remains fascinated with human affairs. That devil often then takes "possession" of another man who is still living here on earth, and causes the other man to do strange things and behave in strange ways. Strange, as out of character for the man, often tormenting the man.




And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way. And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? -- Matthew 8:28-29 KJV



If the two men were not hanging out in graveyards, then they probably wouldn't have become possessed with devils, requiring Jesus to exorcise them.

But these "devils" aren't Satan himself.



So some people need not worry about doing harm to others or committing sins because their path is set- so they certainly do NOT have the free will which you acclaimed god made us 'all' have earlier.


I don't know who those people are, to whom you refer. When the age of freedom comes to an end, and free will is removed, God puts his law into the inward parts of man so that man has to always do Good. So either you're free to sin, or you're forced to do good.





But the part you think you understand could only make sense in the future alongside a new discovery.


You mean the future like today? We can understand "many shall go to and fro", just stand at a street corner and watch the cars go by, and visit an airport and watch the planes come in and depart. Yep! Many are going to and fro. "After" that phrase "many shall go to and fro" comes another time when "knowledge shall be increased". That's the internet age. The age of the web. We'll no longer go to and fro, we're beginning to sit at our computers and communicate instead. We're approaching the end of the age when we travel about. We're all becoming couch potatoes sitting in front of the screen. But something is still happening. We're exchanging "information" all the time. Our "knowledge is going to and fro". Everyone's "knowledge is being increased". So this is the final stage. The very last step before the end, is our internet age.



Maybe there were people who were assured they knew what parts of the bible mean that we can only 'know' with modern knowledge. It is hardly modesty to claim you definitely know what the apparent word of god is to mean.


I don't see the point. Is it immodest to think I understand English enough to read any text at all?

Do you think that god would write a book that nobody could ever understand, and then give that book to man to read?



That is complete faith in yourself, not god.


That's your view. My view is that there is nothing that I can understand without god granting me the wisdom to see the truth. After all, I have not invented the language used to write the text. I haven't even invented a single English word. So, it is certainly only by the grace of god that I can understand any text that is written anywhere at all. How do you understand any thing written in this forum? How do you understand enough to respond intelligently?



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by DRAZIW
 


My point on Satan was said earlier, I won't repeat it again. But wow, reversal of letters... Is that supposed to be a serious point?




I don't know who those people are, to whom you refer. When the age of freedom comes to an end, and free will is removed, God puts his law into the inward parts of man so that man has to always do Good. So either you're free to sin, or you're forced to do good.


I'm talking about the people who you have said you believe are/ have been. The ones which you mention in that above paragraph. If god forces SOME to do 'good' then he is not giving them free will. He also alleviates any responsibility they have to not be 'bad' therefore not creating all people equally or anything like it.




You mean the future like today?


How do you manage to contradict yourself in such a small sentence?No, not today, the future as I said. Knowledge will (hopefully) continue to grow therefore potentially revealing the (correct) answers to parts of the bible which you may believe you understand now. Surely you're not so arrogant as to not accept that knowledge will increase therefore your interpretations could change along with it (such as you deciding which eras are the 'ages'- this is a very simple example of it).




I don't see the point. Is it immodest to think I understand English enough to read any text at all?


You just said in the earlier post that you believe god shall 'recode our DNA'. This is an interpretation you could not have made 400 years ago. Therefore as I said earlier, unless you are at a whole new plateau of arrogance you must accept that future information could make you consider your interpretations at the moment are wrong and you would form new interpretations (like you said, the god would not expect people to fully understand the bible until future times).




That's your view. My view is that there is nothing that I can understand without god granting me the wisdom to see the truth. After all, I have not invented the language used to write the text.


No, if you are stating you are CERTAIN that your interpretations (as many things are exactly that) of the bible are fact and fully known (as you have) then that is a huge amount of faith in yourself as you cannot possibly experience other people's subjectivity.

Your response about language is firstly significantly misunderstanding the point and secondly largely redundant considering the bible in English is at least a second generation translation and therefore not the 'pure' (supposed) word of god. You are merely reading an English version of what someone believes is the closest translation from the original (and copy)- this of course presumes that there was no deliberate alterations made.





new topics
top topics
 
60
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join