Jesus condemned the teachers of homosexuality being ok
-
You've reverted to full 5 year old mode
-
and yet that even if that were true, it would be light years ahead in
terms of development over you, woodypeckerhead. You want to
be an oline "poop on threads" birdbrain, you pay the price.
"mic drop"
-
-
yet, I have never? done it before?
and it's only in one thread. I think.
-
-
-
You get into a spot where you have nothing to add. Nothing to refute what I say and nothing to add on your own. You're waiting for the next article on The Constitution but it isn't there. The solution? Repost the same thing! Then say mic drop. Brilliant
You may now post the same thing again
-
Cal, your rhetoric is about as bad as ISIS at times. What is your point? Also, I would say that your understanding of the OT and NT and how the over-arching theme of all Biblical texts points to Christ is missing entirely. How do we think Christ would handle Homosexuals today? How do you think he confronted them back in the 1st Century? Christ took the OT and flipped it inside out. Christ revealed who God really is, and that is because man still had a limited idea of God and his nature.
I know that the Christian idea of the "Bible" being completely infallible is up there and equal to the same concept that Jesus is God (even though the bible never says of itself that it is perfect or infallible and most text in the bible that speak of scripture are only speaking of the OT), but one must understand that the OT, even though inspired by God and the Holy Spirit, is written still by men who did not completely understand God. This led to text, laws, rules that clearly depicted God in the wrong light. If the OT and the depiction of God is absolutely correct, why did Christ come and reveal a new law and a new kingdom of God. Why isn't the OT more Christ-like?Yes, Homosexuality is sin, so is the plank in your own eye. So is the glancing at the Victoria's secret display in the mall a bit too long. So is gluttony. So is pride in your own religion. So is pornography or envy, jealousy, covetousness and the list goes on and on. Yet, your platitude on an internet forum does very little to represent Christ and His Kingdom in a way that I believe Christ would approve of. Ranting from the rooftops that Gays are bad and according to OT law should be put to death is a narrow narrative absent of Christ Kingdom awareness. Good luck with your religion.
-
Oh shit. Christian slam
-
Well, Brownskidd, you sound like a racist rapist nazi.
How's that for a bounceback? Sorry if you got mad, but it's your fault you are.
Your stupid claim that I proclaim that gays are bad makes you look like pee wee herman, Brownskid.
Ask anybody on the board except for the dimwitted birdbrain, woodypeckerhead - I have said many, many times
that I have worked with people who were gay, more than a few times in my career. I have run meetings with
people who were gay. They never knew, to my awareness anyways, that I knew. They never telegraphed it
knowingly, and most? of the time, I was surprised to find out from a mutal friend. Both make and female, btw.
I always, always, treated them just like anybody else, I treated them the same before and after I found out.
Gays are people, too.
So, that's rotten egg of your rambling right there. I do defend Real Marriage, and the gov forcing all Americans
to redefine it, is wrong. Real Marriage is between a man and a woman. An institution, among other things, that
ascribes responsibility to take care of, and be responsible, for biological and adopted kids, etc.
Now, civil unions would have done that. I believe in leaving people alone. Let gays and goths and nose ring
and lizardpeople be who they are, who they want to be. Just leave me along, too.
Ah, but there is the problem. The left demands to not leave other people alone, while you had better leave them alone.
I was fine with civil unions. Just create it, and run with it. Makes sense. Gays should have the same legal protections, etc.
that Married Couples do. Call it a "civil marriage" maybe.
But to politically and legally demand that all of America CHANGE THE MEANING OF A WORD shouldn't stand.
Ranks up there as stopping a grade school child from silenetly praying at lunch.
The left is due for a rude awakening. And, btw, your nonsense about "What would Chist do..." is okay, until
you ignorantly assume Christ would have done your will.
That's another problem - you hard core, all in libs believe you are gods and your emotionalism rules.
Vote for Trump. We surely need CHANGE from the leftist direction we are going in.
-
Well, Brownskidd, you sound like a racist rapist nazi.
How's that for a bounceback? Sorry if you got mad, but it's your fault you are.
Your stupid claim that I proclaim that gays are bad makes you look like pee wee herman, Brownskid.
Ask anybody on the board except for the dimwitted birdbrain, woodypeckerhead - I have said many, many times
that I have worked with people who were gay, more than a few times in my career. I have run meetings with
people who were gay. They never knew, to my awareness anyways, that I knew. They never telegraphed it
knowingly, and most? of the time, I was surprised to find out from a mutal friend. Both make and female, btw.
I always, always, treated them just like anybody else, I treated them the same before and after I found out.
Gays are people, too.
So, that's rotten egg of your rambling right there. I do defend Real Marriage, and the gov forcing all Americans
to redefine it, is wrong. Real Marriage is between a man and a woman. An institution, among other things, that
ascribes responsibility to take care of, and be responsible, for biological and adopted kids, etc.
Now, civil unions would have done that. I believe in leaving people alone. Let gays and goths and nose ring
and lizardpeople be who they are, who they want to be. Just leave me along, too.
Ah, but there is the problem. The left demands to not leave other people alone, while you had better leave them alone.
I was fine with civil unions. Just create it, and run with it. Makes sense. Gays should have the same legal protections, etc.
that Married Couples do. Call it a "civil marriage" maybe.
But to politically and legally demand that all of America CHANGE THE MEANING OF A WORD shouldn't stand.
Ranks up there as stopping a grade school child from silenetly praying at lunch.
The left is due for a rude awakening. And, btw, your nonsense about "What would Chist do..." is okay, until
you ignorantly assume Christ would have done your will.
That's another problem - you hard core, all in libs believe you are gods and your emotionalism rules.
Vote for Trump. We surely need CHANGE from the leftist direction we are going in.
Well, Brownskidd, you sound like a racist rapist nazi.
How's that for a bounceback? Sorry if you got mad, but it's your fault you are.
Your stupid claim that I proclaim that gays are bad makes you look like pee wee herman, Brownskid.
Ask anybody on the board except for the dimwitted birdbrain, woodypeckerhead - I have said many, many times
that I have worked with people who were gay, more than a few times in my career. I have run meetings with
people who were gay. They never knew, to my awareness anyways, that I knew. They never telegraphed it
knowingly, and most? of the time, I was surprised to find out from a mutal friend. Both make and female, btw.
I always, always, treated them just like anybody else, I treated them the same before and after I found out.
Gays are people, too.
So, that's rotten egg of your rambling right there. I do defend Real Marriage, and the gov forcing all Americans
to redefine it, is wrong. Real Marriage is between a man and a woman. An institution, among other things, that
ascribes responsibility to take care of, and be responsible, for biological and adopted kids, etc.
Now, civil unions would have done that. I believe in leaving people alone. Let gays and goths and nose ring
and lizardpeople be who they are, who they want to be. Just leave me along, too.
Ah, but there is the problem. The left demands to not leave other people alone, while you had better leave them alone.
I was fine with civil unions. Just create it, and run with it. Makes sense. Gays should have the same legal protections, etc.
that Married Couples do. Call it a "civil marriage" maybe.
But to politically and legally demand that all of America CHANGE THE MEANING OF A WORD shouldn't stand.
Ranks up there as stopping a grade school child from silenetly praying at lunch.
The left is due for a rude awakening. And, btw, your nonsense about "What would Chist do..." is okay, until
you ignorantly assume Christ would have done your will.
That's another problem - you hard core, all in libs believe you are gods and your emotionalism rules.
Vote for Trump. We surely need CHANGE from the leftist direction we are going in.
I don't know what to think about that rambling.
I do agree that Civil union should be allowed, as you do. But we should understand, that the word "Marriage" has no spiritual value, at all. So what if our government says, "let's call it marriage". So what? What does that do on any spiritual plane of existence? Nothing. Let people call it marriage, no skin off my back, yours or anyone else's.
What should be realized is that government recognition of anything, does not validate it spiritually. A signed legal document means nothing in a spiritual sense. Marriage has and will always be a commitment between two people, that's it. The government got involved because the government saw opportunity.
Think of it like this. When are a man and a woman married? By today's westernized tradition it's after the marriage certificate is signed and then a person licensed to oversee the marriage signs the marriage certificate. Where, in this process, is it spiritually binding? There is nothing in that Bible that tells us how it should be done, and if we look to tradition, which tradition is used? IMO, as said earlier, it's a commitment between two people and their witnesses. Most marriages have used witnesses as a way to validate the social marriage of two people. Then, the consummation of the marriage sealed the deal between the man and the woman. That is when, I believe, at least according to Jewish tradition (which Christianity would be closely related) is when the marriage is spiritually binding.
But, even then, divorce was allowed in ancient OT.
How our government defines marriage is okay with me. I don't have to accept it, nor do I have to agree with it. Marriage is only a word and its secular defining means nothing spiritually.
I say all that to say this. We are living in a post-Christian society, and I would argue that we were hardly ever a Christian nation to begin with (see the treatment of indians, slaves, immigrants, etc.,). There is no politician that will usher in an era of Christian morality, so thinking trump somehow will change 'Murica is vain and wishful thinking.
A good example of someone that lived his fullest while living in a carnal society is that of Daniel. Daniel managed to live and prosper during the Babylonian period, along with Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. The babylonians were FAR from Jewish. Yet, Daniel through his life and example flourished and was blessed. Do you think Daniel was blessed because he fought against secular meaning of a word? Do you think he prospered by spouting religious rhetoric in public venues in his time?
We don't have to agree with what the government does, but we do need to live a life that is an example of what our God is.
-
you pick one character out of the Bible and use that to justify your rationalizaitons?
How can we be "post-Christian" when there are Christian churches all over our country?
check this out::
US Christians numbers 'decline sharply', poll finds. The number of Americans who identify as Christian has fallen nearly eight percentage points in only seven years, according to a new survey. Pew Research Center found that 71% of Americans identified as Christian in 2014 - down from 78% in 2007.May 12, 2015
so it was a bit over THREE FOURTHS of our country, per the poll, and now it's a bit less than 3/4ths?
we're "post-Christian" like obamao was supposed to be "post-racial" ?
nonsense.
check this out:
http://www.soundvision.com/article/wedding-statistics-in-the-united-states
here do weddings take place?80 percent of weddings are performed in churches or synagoguesthat makes your claim that there is nothing spiritual about Real Marriage?and Daniel, in all his exploits, was always true to Jerusalem - he was saved from the lionshe was cast to, by an angel, if I remember correctly.Your points are inaccurate. the worst claim is that we were never a Christian country becauseof slavery etc. Is that like you think no one is a Christian because we all sin?That we weren't made in God's image because we look different?Your post needs a lot of work - your opinions don't match your listed attempts at justification. -
you pick one character out of the Bible and use that to justify your rationalizaitons?
How can we be "post-Christian" when there are Christian churches all over our country?
check this out::
US Christians numbers 'decline sharply', poll finds. The number of Americans who identify as Christian has fallen nearly eight percentage points in only seven years, according to a new survey. Pew Research Center found that 71% of Americans identified as Christian in 2014 - down from 78% in 2007.May 12, 2015
so it was a bit over THREE FOURTHS of our country, per the poll, and now it's a bit less than 3/4ths?
we're "post-Christian" like obamao was supposed to be "post-racial" ?
nonsense.
check this out:
http://www.soundvision.com/article/wedding-statistics-in-the-united-states
here do weddings take place?80 percent of weddings are performed in churches or synagoguesthat makes your claim that there is nothing spiritual about Real Marriage?and Daniel, in all his exploits, was always true to Jerusalem - he was saved from the lionshe was cast to, by an angel, if I remember correctly.Your points are inaccurate. the worst claim is that we were never a Christian country becauseof slavery etc. Is that like you think no one is a Christian because we all sin?That we weren't made in God's image because we look different?Your post needs a lot of work - your opinions don't match your listed attempts at justification.you pick one character out of the Bible and use that to justify your rationalizaitons?
How can we be "post-Christian" when there are Christian churches all over our country?
check this out::
US Christians numbers 'decline sharply', poll finds. The number of Americans who identify as Christian has fallen nearly eight percentage points in only seven years, according to a new survey. Pew Research Center found that 71% of Americans identified as Christian in 2014 - down from 78% in 2007.May 12, 2015
Lots of people identify as Christian because that is how they were raised. Clearly, they aren't holding any hard line about the faith or else we would be living in a theocracy.
-
I disagree. Christianity isn't a political legal framwork like Islam is in so many countries.
"Lots of people", sure, I agree with that. But "lots of black people" hate police hate white people,
lots of white people don't trust inner blacks...
hardly basis for labeling an entire country on. I was just disputing his claim of our country being "post-Christian"
-
you pick one character out of the Bible and use that to justify your rationalizaitons?
How can we be "post-Christian" when there are Christian churches all over our country?
check this out::
US Christians numbers 'decline sharply', poll finds. The number of Americans who identify as Christian has fallen nearly eight percentage points in only seven years, according to a new survey. Pew Research Center found that 71% of Americans identified as Christian in 2014 - down from 78% in 2007.May 12, 2015
so it was a bit over THREE FOURTHS of our country, per the poll, and now it's a bit less than 3/4ths?
we're "post-Christian" like obamao was supposed to be "post-racial" ?
nonsense.
check this out:
http://www.soundvision.com/article/wedding-statistics-in-the-united-states
here do weddings take place?80 percent of weddings are performed in churches or synagoguesthat makes your claim that there is nothing spiritual about Real Marriage?and Daniel, in all his exploits, was always true to Jerusalem - he was saved from the lionshe was cast to, by an angel, if I remember correctly.Your points are inaccurate. the worst claim is that we were never a Christian country becauseof slavery etc. Is that like you think no one is a Christian because we all sin?That we weren't made in God's image because we look different?Your post needs a lot of work - your opinions don't match your listed attempts at justification.you pick one character out of the Bible and use that to justify your rationalizaitons?*
*creates thread called "Jesus condemned the teachers of homosexuality being ok" to justify stance on "real marriage"...
-
-
you pick one character out of the Bible and use that to justify your rationalizaitons?
How can we be "post-Christian" when there are Christian churches all over our country?
check this out::
US Christians numbers 'decline sharply', poll finds. The number of Americans who identify as Christian has fallen nearly eight percentage points in only seven years, according to a new survey. Pew Research Center found that 71% of Americans identified as Christian in 2014 - down from 78% in 2007.May 12, 2015
so it was a bit over THREE FOURTHS of our country, per the poll, and now it's a bit less than 3/4ths?
we're "post-Christian" like obamao was supposed to be "post-racial" ?
nonsense.
check this out:
http://www.soundvision.com/article/wedding-statistics-in-the-united-states
here do weddings take place?80 percent of weddings are performed in churches or synagoguesthat makes your claim that there is nothing spiritual about Real Marriage?and Daniel, in all his exploits, was always true to Jerusalem - he was saved from the lionshe was cast to, by an angel, if I remember correctly.Your points are inaccurate. the worst claim is that we were never a Christian country becauseof slavery etc. Is that like you think no one is a Christian because we all sin?That we weren't made in God's image because we look different?Your post needs a lot of work - your opinions don't match your listed attempts at justification....check this out:http://www.soundvision.com/article/wedding-statistics-in-the-united-states
here do weddings take place?80 percent of weddings are performed in churches or synagoguesthat makes your claim that there is nothing spiritual about Real Marriage?You do know your "source" on marriages in churches and synagogues comes from an Islamic-based website, right? Not exactly the best way to support Christian viewpoints...
-
Well, Brownskidd, you sound like a racist rapist nazi.
How's that for a bounceback? Sorry if you got mad, but it's your fault you are.
Your stupid claim that I proclaim that gays are bad makes you look like pee wee herman, Brownskid.
Ask anybody on the board except for the dimwitted birdbrain, woodypeckerhead - I have said many, many times
that I have worked with people who were gay, more than a few times in my career. I have run meetings with
people who were gay. They never knew, to my awareness anyways, that I knew. They never telegraphed it
knowingly, and most? of the time, I was surprised to find out from a mutal friend. Both make and female, btw.
I always, always, treated them just like anybody else, I treated them the same before and after I found out.
Gays are people, too.
So, that's rotten egg of your rambling right there. I do defend Real Marriage, and the gov forcing all Americans
to redefine it, is wrong. Real Marriage is between a man and a woman. An institution, among other things, that
ascribes responsibility to take care of, and be responsible, for biological and adopted kids, etc.
Now, civil unions would have done that. I believe in leaving people alone. Let gays and goths and nose ring
and lizardpeople be who they are, who they want to be. Just leave me along, too.
Ah, but there is the problem. The left demands to not leave other people alone, while you had better leave them alone.
I was fine with civil unions. Just create it, and run with it. Makes sense. Gays should have the same legal protections, etc.
that Married Couples do. Call it a "civil marriage" maybe.
But to politically and legally demand that all of America CHANGE THE MEANING OF A WORD shouldn't stand.
Ranks up there as stopping a grade school child from silenetly praying at lunch.
The left is due for a rude awakening. And, btw, your nonsense about "What would Chist do..." is okay, until
you ignorantly assume Christ would have done your will.
That's another problem - you hard core, all in libs believe you are gods and your emotionalism rules.
Vote for Trump. We surely need CHANGE from the leftist direction we are going in.
You can't say lizardpeople cracker ass. That's OUR word.Well, Brownskidd, you sound like a racist rapist nazi.
How's that for a bounceback? Sorry if you got mad, but it's your fault you are.
Your stupid claim that I proclaim that gays are bad makes you look like pee wee herman, Brownskid.
Ask anybody on the board except for the dimwitted birdbrain, woodypeckerhead - I have said many, many times
that I have worked with people who were gay, more than a few times in my career. I have run meetings with
people who were gay. They never knew, to my awareness anyways, that I knew. They never telegraphed it
knowingly, and most? of the time, I was surprised to find out from a mutal friend. Both make and female, btw.
I always, always, treated them just like anybody else, I treated them the same before and after I found out.
Gays are people, too.
So, that's rotten egg of your rambling right there. I do defend Real Marriage, and the gov forcing all Americans
to redefine it, is wrong. Real Marriage is between a man and a woman. An institution, among other things, that
ascribes responsibility to take care of, and be responsible, for biological and adopted kids, etc.
Now, civil unions would have done that. I believe in leaving people alone. Let gays and goths and nose ring
and lizardpeople be who they are, who they want to be. Just leave me along, too.
Ah, but there is the problem. The left demands to not leave other people alone, while you had better leave them alone.
I was fine with civil unions. Just create it, and run with it. Makes sense. Gays should have the same legal protections, etc.
that Married Couples do. Call it a "civil marriage" maybe.
But to politically and legally demand that all of America CHANGE THE MEANING OF A WORD shouldn't stand.
Ranks up there as stopping a grade school child from silenetly praying at lunch.
The left is due for a rude awakening. And, btw, your nonsense about "What would Chist do..." is okay, until
you ignorantly assume Christ would have done your will.
That's another problem - you hard core, all in libs believe you are gods and your emotionalism rules.
Vote for Trump. We surely need CHANGE from the leftist direction we are going in.
-
I got it by listening to Coast-to-Coast a few years back.
you got a title of ownership?
nope. right back at ya, lizardlips.
-
LiAR.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better ๐
Register Login