 |
|
|
|
|
July 10th, 2012
10:00 PM ET
Episcopal Church approves same-sex blessing serviceBy Michael Pearson, CNN (CNN) - Episcopal priests will be allowed to conduct services blessing same-sex relationships under a policy approved Tuesday at the church's national convention in Indianapolis. The convention's House of Bishops approved the provisional policy 111-41 with three abstentions Monday, clearing it for consideration by the House of Deputies, which approved it Tuesday evening. The policy was approved in the House of Deputies, following more than an hour of debate, by 78% of the voting lay members and by 76% of clergy. With the vote, the Episcopal Church will become the largest U.S. denomination to officially sanction same-sex relationships. The Episcopal Church has about 1.95 million members in the United States, down 16% over the last decade, according to the church. The service is not considered a marriage ceremony, media affairs representative Nancy Davidge said. FULL STORY
Next entry »Ex-Scientologist: Cruise was top church recruit
« Previous entryMilitant Islamist groups destroy shrines in Mali
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
o "Abrahamics" believe that their god created all of us and of course that includes the g-ay members of the human race. Also, those who have studied ho-mo-se-xuality have determined that there is no choice involved therefore ga-ys are ga-y because god made them that way.---------------–
To wit:
1. The Royal College of Psy-chiatrists stated in 2007:
“ Despite almost a century of psy-choanalytic and psy-chological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heteros-exual or hom-ose-xual orientation. It would appear that s-exual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of ge-netic factors and the early ut-erine environment. Se-xual orientation is therefore not a choice.[60] "
2. "Garcia-Falgueras and Swaab state in the abstract of their 2010 study, "The fe-tal brain develops during the intraut-erine period in the male direction through a direct action of tes-tosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hor-mone surge. In this way, our gender identi-ty (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and s-exual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb. There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender ident–ity or s-exual orientation."[8
3. See also the Philadelphia Inquirer review “Gay Gene, Deconstructed”, 12/12/2011. Said review addresses the following “How do genes associated with ho-mose-xuality avoid being weeded out by Darwinian evolution?”
Of course, those gays who belong to Abrahamic religions supposedly abide by the rules of no adu-ltery or for-nication allowed.
And because of basic biology differences said monogamous ventures should always be called same-se-x unions not same-se-x marriages.
To wit:
From below, on top, backwards, forwards, from this side of the Moon and from the other side too, ga-y s-exual activity is still mutual mas-turbation caused by one or more complex s-exual differences. Some differences are visually obvious in for example the complex maleness of DeGeneres, Billy Jean King and Rosie O'Donnell.
Yes, heteros-exuals practice many of the same "moves" but there is never a doubt who is the female and who is the male.
As noted, there are basic biological differences in gay unions vs. heterose-xual marriage. Government benefits are the same in both but making the distinction is important for census data and for social responses with respect to potential issues with disease, divorce and family interactions.
So you are saying this is a utterly unique sin, the ONLY sin that harms NO ONE. Odd sin. Why does God keep creating people who can be nothing BUT gay, only to condemn them for an immutable trait HE devised, that harms no one.
And then, if they act in the same positive and affirming ways as HIS other children do, then they sin further.
Twisted.
Might want to read the comments again. There is no mention of proper gay activity being a sin.
And a prayer just for those who might think proper gayness is a sin against god or anyone else:
The Apostles' Creed 2012 (updated by yours truly based on the studies of NT historians and theologians of the past 200 years)
Should I believe in a god whose existence cannot be proven
and said god if he/she/it exists resides in an unproven,
human-created, spirit state of bliss called heaven?????
I believe there was a 1st century CE, Jewish, simple,
preacher-man who was conceived by a Jewish carpenter
named Joseph living in Nazareth and born of a young Jewish
girl named Mary. (Some say he was a mamzer.)
Jesus was summarily crucified for being a temple rabble-rouser by
the Roman troops in Jerusalem serving under Pontius Pilate,
He was buried in an unmarked grave and still lies
a-mouldering in the ground somewhere outside of
Jerusalem.
Said Jesus' story was embellished and "mythicized" by
many semi-fiction writers. A bodily resurrection and
ascension stories were promulgated to compete with the
Caesar myths. Said stories were so popular that they
grew into a religion known today as Catholicism/Christianity
and featuring dark-age, daily wine to blood and bread to body rituals
called the eucharistic sacrifice of the non-atoning Jesus.
Amen
(References used are available upon request.)
Reality, you are a pervert and will burn forever in hell for posting this lie. God did not make people gay. Gay people are gay because they don't know God. They never read the Bible.
I am not concerned in the context of this blog about what the government sanctions when it comes to gay marriage/unions. For the record, I would not want to live in any kind of theocracy (unless ruled directly by God), and am quite content to keep religious doctrine in the church and out of government. If you want a gay civil union, I won't oppose it.
With that in mind, my comment is directed at Episcopalians and other misguided Christians (or "christians"), not atheists, jews, muslims, hindu... et al. Homôsëxuality is a sin against your body, and does not have the direct impact on innocent bystanders that other "outward sins" do.
Brothers and sisters, you are treading dangerous ground. The Bible has much to say on the subject, none of it good. And for the nit pickers, I mean in the New Testament, not the Old.
Speaking of which, you would think that if homôsëxuality was a Christian behavior, there would be Biblical passages supporting it. Homôsëxuality was common among the gentiles, and quite opposed to Jewish law. Wouldn't the apostles have singled that out for approval? No, there is no ringing approval anywhere for homôsëxual practices. Actually, when Peter proclaims what the gentiles should abstain from, sëxual immorality is right there in a very short list.
You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sëxual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. – Acts 15:29
1st off, the original text never condemned gay people. This is easily Googled. The only people who don't want to spend the two minutes Googling it are the people who don't want to know the truth.
2ndly, Christ met a gay man via the Roman Centurion and said of him, Never have I seen faith greater than this. He also mentions gay men as born eunuchs in Matthew. Neither time did He condemn.
Please explain where it says the Centurian was g.ay?
When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help. 6 “Lord,” he said, “my servant lies at home paralyzed, suffering terribly.”
7 Jesus said to him, “Shall I come and heal him?”
8 The centurion replied, “Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. 9 For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.”
10 When Jesus heard this, he was amazed and said to those following him, “Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. 11 I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. 12 But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
13 Then Jesus said to the centurion, “Go! Let it be done just as you believed it would.” And his servant was healed at that moment.
Mike, the fact that there is any controversy about that is just one more demonstration that your "divinely" written holy book is mainly man-made fiction.
Mike, what "original text" are you referring to?
You can make up laws to suit your wants,needs and desires. The Word of God stands as it stood 3500 years ago. There is no compromise in Gods Word. You the atheist will die off before the Word of God disappears.You must conform to Him, He or the Bible will never change to suit you. The Word of God has defeated every Foe that has come against it. Rome,Greece,Egypt to name just a few once great empires who are nothing more than shells now. Read the 29 and the 30th chapters of Ezekiel and read about the fall of Egypt. For God will not be mocked, for whatever a man sows that he will reap. The kingdom of God stands strong and is still saving lives everyday. The Bible tells us of the great falling away in the last days. These things that are going on is nothing new. No matter what is said or who comes against the kingdom of God. King David said it three thousand years ago in Psalm 62. I shall not be moved. My soul thirst for the Living God.
Replace every instance of 'God' with 'Zeus' in your silly rant. Doesn't that make it sound ridiculous? I've simply changed a name. That's how the rest of us feel about what you've written.
There i snot so much as a single reason in this universe as to why I need to conform to your god.
hmmm maybe your right,....nay Pagan party
http://vimeo.com/6857695
your Christians need to enjoy life you only live once
frekin you tube freking CNN for not embedding vimeo,.. freking Christians for there Moral majority im sick of my religion being infringed upon,.. i want to go back to the age of antiquity back when the world was full of "Love"
" That's how the rest of us feel about what you've written."
-Does that matter.... Does the truth changes by how you feel No, it does not!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"There is not so much as a single reason in this universe as to why I need to conform to your god."
No, because you ARE ALREADY conformed to YOUR god! If you're not allowing God, your Creator to conform you, there is one that is eager, willing and able to do it for you, and you have no power to resist him apart from Christ. He is the father of lies, and the father of fools! That's fitting name for him, and also for you!
Did you honestly just refer to King David to justify your hatred of gay people? Do you know the story if David and Jonathan? Your love is greater than that of any woman as they wept in each other's arms and kissed. The most passionate love story between two humans in the Bible is between these two men. Wow, just wow.
Wow......some people get slavery in their mindset and go with it. Good for you. Now, get back on your knees
It is not god who is being mocked. It is god's followers who are.
Prism I do not have have one creator I have two – commonly known as my parents. That's it there are no others. You can believe in your particular version of your god all that you want to, within some limits. But do not think that your god is my god because that is just not true. Your fairy tales do not apply to other people.
Those are very mean things to say, Tom.
wow. lots of activity.
The basic qualification to stand for any political office should be that one is an atheist
Troll of the regular poster @Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son...
Im not sure. may be it is the regular Tom
Ah, a persistent one, eh? Child.
The Constitution of the United States
Article. VI.
...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
It was there in the beginning and has never been amended.
Everyone from all churches should be put into some kind of c0ncentration camp like Auschw1tz
What about atheists then? Dachau? You call lots of people lots of names, and I think you deserve all of them and more.
Troll of the regular poster @Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son.
Im not sure. may be it is the regular Tom, Tom
All religious people are r_e_t_a_r_ds
Troll of the regular poster @Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son
Im not sure. may be I was too quick ti judge and it is the regular Tom
Tom, I have been seeing your responses posted for a while now, and I have noticed that you are growing ever more hate-filled. You need Jesus. He loves even you. Have a blessed day, Sir.
Marriage doesn't need "blessing" – it needs to be legal.
Their "blessing" is an advertisement for themselves: one that says "with these few words we give onto this union – we the religious idiots now feel that you are better for it". Which is just retarded because no one cares if they bless it or not.
If you're planning on receiving any benefits from the government than you better have that marriage certificate acknowledge by the government. And don't you ever lose it either. It is simply the most valuable piece of en-t-i-t-lement you and your spouse can attain.
@BRC
@DoubleR,
I don't want this to be as insulting as it's gong to sound, but there is no other way to put it. You realize that you just siad "I don't want to think", right?
Don't worry, you're not insulting me. I'm not easily insulted, but it's not that I say I don't want to think. It's that I don't like to deal in "What ifs". With the exception of preparing for disasters, or training for combat, hypothetical situations are pointless. That's just the way I feel. Thinking outside the box doesn't automatically mean that I have to deal hypothetically. If I have a problem, I try to find the most logical solution possible. Sometimes I have to think unconventionally. However, in my life, I ask the Lord to reveal that to me what's best and help me to make a decision. And he ususally does, or else he'll let me make a mistake in order to teach a lesson. And that's fine, the Lord never promised that everything would go perfectly. But either way, I like to deal in reality. And the reality is that I believe in the word of God, and I could never put that aside. That's just me though. You have your own reality and it doesn't involve the word of God. I'm personally not condemning you for it, I don't agree with that, and that's ok. We don't always have to agree, that's the great thing about debates.
@ Madtown
"How do you get around the FACTS then, that the bible was written by human beings?"
Very true... the bible was written by man, however it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Those men who wrote the bible had the very spirit of God in them as they wrote it. The bible says that in the beginning was God's word. He spoke the world into existence merely by saying so. That's a powerful word if you ask me. However, me quoting the bible as proof to a non-believer is like trying to explain Shakespere to a 2 year old. They don't want to hear it. The problem with men is we are always trying to prove who's bigger and better. So it is with organized religion. Religion in and of itself is flawed, even the bible says so. So with that being said, which version of the bible is truest to it's original text? Is the Catholic translation more accurate than the New International Version, or the New King James, or the American Standard Bible? Why isn't there only one translation? Those are all good questions. And they will be debated until the end of time, but the word of God is eternal. And as I read the bible, no matter what translation I read, I pray that he reveal his word to me. And I know you'll probably jump all over that statement, but just as those who wrote the bible asked the same thing of the Holy Spirit, to reveal his word to them so they may write it, I ask the same thing even when I read it.
@DoubleR
"with that being said, which version of the bible is truest to it's original text? Is the Catholic translation more accurate than the New International Version, or the New King James, or the American Standard Bible? Why isn't there only one translation? Those are all good questions. "
Those aren't good questions. Those are ignorant questions is what they are. All versions say the same thing with the exception of the NWT which is a JW plant. The real problem is you people don't know the difference between dynamic equivalency vs formal equivalency. If people weren't so ignorant of that it wouldn't even be a discussion.
Why isn't there only one translation? Those are all good questions. And they will be debated until the end of time, but the word of God is eternal.
-------
You make the entire point yourself, you just can't see it. If God is as almighty as you believe, and "his word" is the only way, why wouldn't there be only 1 version? The fact that there are many versions and variations drives home the point that it's the creation of imperfect human beings. As far as the words being "inspired" by the holy spirit, how do you know this to be true and who told you? Let me guess........the people that wrote the word?! Of course. I believe in God, I don't believe in religion. Religion is a creation of the human mind, meant to try and answer questions we are just not able to answer. It's ok to not know everything!
nottolate, "The real problem is you people don't know the difference between dynamic equivalency vs formal equivalency. If people weren't so ignorant of that it wouldn't even be a discussion."
That, coming from someone who doesn't even know the difference between "to" and "too", leaves a bit of a question about who is ignorant.
Arabic / Hebrew is a hard language difficult to translate to english.
Bible wasn't written in english
To – SoldierOfConscience
"how can you bless a sin? its a contradiction. Next lets start blessing adulterers, Liars. Murderers."
So, you rae actualy goign to tory to compar a gay person falling in love and forming a realtionship with a soul mate to being a liar, adulterer, or murderer?
Did you actually think about your post before sending it?
Why are behaviors that are universally esteemed for straight folks considered grave sin's if gay folks do the same things?
TC
A gay person does not fall in love to be gay! He's gay cos he has s.ex with guys! If he chooses who to fall in love with that means he could have chosen a woman as well! Gay people are not any different from u! U can be gay if u want to! So don't be sad that someone says its wrong. Humans r hets!
We've looked everywhere for a gay gene or a mental abnormality but it has been proven beyond doubt that it is a choice! So as it goes against human nature it is wrong! The comparison is right. We always want to do right but mostly do wrong! That does not change wrong into right!
@ Nii – if the above weren't so sadly delusional, they would qualify as perhaps the most unintentionally funny posts of the day.
@Nii
You have REFUSED to answer me EVERY TIME I have asked you if being left-handed is a choice as well! Afer all, we can't find a sinlge gene that causes someone to be left handed can we? A single gene is such a simplistic thought when it comes to a human that it merely shows your have absolutely no knowledge in human biology.
Nii
you said' We've looked everywhere for a gay gene or a mental abnormality but it has been proven beyond doubt that it is a choice"
So you have proof beyond doubt....You are now required to show this proof...
There is likely no "gay Gene" rather if you undertand how things grow from the instructions given in their genes, you would have some understanding of the epi-genome as well. It is the epi-genome that determines when certain genes are turned on ond off, which can in turn control certain hormone levels. It is these hormone levels that change the body into a male or female, BUT the brain develops differently. All of the proper hormaones could be present for the bodies development of gender, but may not be present in the correct mounts that determine the gender of the brain.
to look for a "gay gene" is futile. and to think that being gay is a choice is just the epidome of ignorance.
Do you ever ACTUALLY know what you are talking about or you just post your wild whims as if they are truth.
Nii: Where has it been proven beyond a doubt that it is a choice? How about some peer reviewed journals?
@hawaiiguest
You have REFUSED to answer me EVERY TIME I have asked you if being left-handed is a choice as well! Afer all, we can't find a sinlge gene that causes someone to be left handed can we? A single gene is such a simplistic thought when it comes to a human that it merely shows your have absolutely no knowledge in human biology.
Just a question... whether they're born that way or not, is it not possible for someone who is left handed to teach themselves how to write with their right hand? Or right handed to write left. Or a left handed batter to bat right, or for a right handed basketball player to shoot with his left? It is in our nature to be right or left handed, but we are not cotrainsed by that. We could teach ourself to use the other hand, it has been proven. Just a thought.
@Double R –
As a left handed person, yes, I can tell you, I can learn to do things with my right hand. And I have. But guess what?
I am still fundamentally left handed. Nothing can change that. My brain. Is set up. That way.
By your logic, it sounds like you're trying to hint that you can teach a gay guy to stick his dick in a chick, and that might teach him to be straight?
Nii, every time you post, the entire forum IQ drops by at least 20 points.
DoubleR
By your logic, you can be taught to be gay....do you really think that is possible....and i do not mean by isolation from the opposite s e x such as occurs in prison. That is a seperate phenomina and is as different as h0m0s3xual BEHAVIOR and actually being h0m0s3xual.
So can we teach you to be gay?
SAM
That is de point! S.ex is a blind instinct! How u satisfy it is basically habit-forming. Like hunger which is also a blind instinct. Frenchmen learn to eat Ghanaian cuisine so why do u make it sound like its so hard. Prisoners do it all the time switching from women 2 guys so why not vice versa
@Double R
That's going beyond the actual scope of the point. Nii was talking about genetics with a fundamental misunderstanding on how things can be expressed genetically. Either way, with your point, it's apples and oranges. Left-handedness is merely a matter of fine motor skills in one or the other hands. Motor skills can be learned and practice.
Can YOU practice to be attracted and aroused by something that would disguist you now? Orientation and handedness are so far removed that I find your implied comparrison completely idiotic.
@Nii
Ra..pe (which is what happens in some prisons) is not about se.xual gratification. It is about power and control. Do you not know this? Are you really that ignorant?
"It is in our nature to be right or left handed, but we are not cotrainsed by that. We could teach ourself to use the other hand, it has been proven. Just a thought."
Because the experts have shown that trying to change your sexual orientation is detrimental to your over all well being. Because of the aggressive promotion of efforts to change sexual orientation through therapy, a number of medical, health, and mental health professional organizations have issued public statements about the dangers of this approach. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American School Counselor Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of SocialWorkers, together representing more than 480,000 mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus is not something that needs to or can be “cured."
@ hawaiiguest – in response to your two questions regarding Nii, the answers are 1. willfully and 2. Yes.
Nii
So you are there....YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO SHOW YOUR PROOF FROM THE ABOVE POST
Without it, you are a proven liar and should disappear from this forum.
Someone is afraid!
H A W A I I
W H Y I S R A P E A S E X C R I M E T H E N ? D O N 'T B E S I L L Y!
When it comes to human se.xual behaviour the a r s e n a l is vast and varied so anyone who will sit in the corner and say he's gay, he's a r a p i s t or p e d o p h i l e is silly!
@Nii
Wow you're not even trying to dodge points are you? Now you're just spewing incoherent idiocy. Address the points you useless tool.
@ Nii – It's really quite simple. Just follow these easy steps to understanding why gay does not equal pedophile/r.apist.
Gay = consensual relationship with another like minded adult.
Pedophile = non-consensual relations with a child (including children under certain ages that States mandate are legally unable to give consent themselves)
R.ape = non-consensual forced relations with any person against their will.
I hope that helps clear up your obviously flawed understanding.
Obviously HAWAII if someone told me u had made some points, I'll be shocked! Anyway, I don't think u need me to make any more points just read your own over and over again as you canz't understand mine!
I did not just get up and say that there is no biological explanation for gay phenomena! Fact is that no biology book will tell u that humans are hermaphrodites like snails(called gay). We are se.xually uni-polar. Nor are there psychaitric factors! It is a behaviour like religion, cuisine n music!
@Nii
And yet, like the coward that you are, you continue to refuse to address such a simple point as "are left handed people making the choice to be left handed?". You can't even propose a pseudo-intellectual discussion. You fling out wild assertions with no citations, links to articles or anything, and duck and weave around ever answering criticism to your cr.ap.
I'll state it again Nii, you are a complete coward, without the backbone to even make some kind of lame appeal to authority to the bible to back up your idiocy.
I am left-handed. But, I am Not "gay." However, if I was the type that found a natural urge to cut myself or to cut others, would such be tolerated? How about psychopathic killers? I do not doubt that these people are simply doing what the little voices in their heads tell them to do. Just because there is an "urge" doesn't equate that there is some sort of right. However, I say let these se-x-ual perv-ert-s do as their bodies crave, it IS their bodies. It isn't my business what they do. BUT- I should never be obliged by Govt. or big Media to "accept" this ludicrous behaviour as normal. And that is the way the thought police are taking us.
Right, because equal protection under the law absolutely FORCES you to accept it. Maybe you should actually think before you write Son.
HAWAII
Left-handedness can be chosen! The soccer world has shown it!
Hawaii
I thought u were reading the whole thread n since my connection is bad cos of weather u had been answered!
HAWAII
Dont even go there with the BIBLE! I don't even need it! Which B.i.o.l.o.g.y text says humans are h.e.r.m.a.p.h.r.o.d.i.t.e.s!
HAWAII
For your information, I'm ambidexterous! I am predominantly right-handed but there are a few things I can't use my right cos I have used my left for too long for them like brushing my teeth! If u want to compare them then u r saying being gay can be reversed!*hand on mouth*
WHO?
U forget a simple fact about Christianity! Men wrote the Bible, The Son of Man is our God and we know that very well! If you can only learn that I don't think my 5yo niece has to learn one page of the Bible to beat u in a quiz!
yet it is a certainty that he is not my god.
fr nii:
>...We've looked everywhere for a gay gene or a mental abnormality but it has been proven beyond doubt that it is a choice!...<
No, it is NOT a "choice", nor has then "been proven beyond doubt". Quit reading the garbage from the "focus on the 'family'" CULT, and get the TRUE facts about glbt people.
Ok so I shud quit feeding on garbage to feed on worse garbage?
I went through the "scientific evidence" for being gay word by word!
Afterwards it made me see why everybody shud be forced to learn the Natural Sciences!
I cud have written it in my bed! lol
STOP Obama's war against Medical Marijuana Patients – Support UFCW Local 770
http://www.ufcw770.org/cannabis
Lalalalalala !!! Happy Happy Happy !!!
I read the other day that the Episcopal Church has lost about 10% of its membership over the past 10 years, most likely because of wishy washy theology like this, trying to please everyone and failing to advance the truth.
"I read the other day that the Episcopal Church has lost about 10% of its membership over the past 10 years, most likely because of wishy washy theology like this"
Actually many churches are losing followers but it's because they are actually using their brains and know your religion is a cult.
trying to please everyone and failing to advance the truth."
LOL what a joke....that "truth" you speak of is nothing more than words written by men to control you. Open your eyes.
When it comes to religion there is more than 1 version of the "truth"
It is so sad how people can be like this lol what many don't understand a Christian is called to witness and preach (LK 24:46-48). I am sorry there is no way any true believer in Christ will keep his/her mouth shut. Like in the old days, you'll have to kill us first and even if you did, more will rise. God's Word will persist.
Mans word of god will continue as long as there are suckers born to believe it.
Man made your book
man created your god
man created your religion
The Knight of God,
If somehow the world were to be decimated and all religions and religious writings were to be lost, superst'itious thoughts and behavior would probably rise again... but the beliefs would be quite different. There is no evidence that Jesus visits and speaks to anyone with his truths today.
Science and facts, on the other hand, would eventually reappear in *exactly* the same form.
IN the old days it was Christians killing anybody who didn't agree with everything the Pope said.
'Atta boy, kill in the name of man-made religion. If someone other human being dare not think exactly like you do, KILL 'EM!!!!!!!!
"a Christian is called to witness and preach"
What incredible arrogance for "true believers in Christ" to believe that people want to hear their preaching.
This is why people find you folks tiresome. This supposed claim to authority.
Its breaking my head against a wall. There are people here who want to support the deviancies and want proof that they are bad. There is no proof in this world. To give you an analogy, if a 2-D creature were to demand proof of something in this world, we could not provide it even if we wanted to.
You must have faith. Then you will be rewarded. Im out of here for now. got better things to do.
You're trying to convince people that someone whos life is different but harmless is bad because a proofless book written by men from a backward time says it is. The fact that you're not succeeding is a good thing. The fact that there are lots of people who agree with you is not.
To me, proof that someone is "good" and doing the right thing, comes when they act and think opposite of the ways you do.
There are no good people
@Bill Deacon,
What a defeatist outlook. Of course there are good people. There are all sorts of others, from crappy to evil, but there are absolutely good people. To say otherwise is either ignorant or a lie.
I thought we atheists were the hopeless ones?
At last report, Diogenes was still hunting....
Without the Bible, would you have any other reference for your claims? And if not, then what seperates your faith from the others?
Reblogged this on Ruminations and commented:
Good news
God's wisdom for gay men.
Matthew 5:30 And if thy penis offends thee, cut it off, and cast [it] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy member should perish, and not [that] thy whole body should be cast into hell.
Amen.
If you confuse "right hand' with 'penis' I really don't every want you to shake my hand.
Well, I suppose anyone that rarely separates them for more time than it takes to post a message is bound to get confused eventually.
wow
Matthew 5:30 And if thy penis offends thee, whack it off, and cast [skeet] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that if one of thy members you cherish, and not [that] thy whole load should be cast into the well.
An open question to the Believers on here today-
If you had never read the bible, and noone had ever told you that "God" doesn't like it; and you saw a same gender couple in a commited relationship where they cared for each other, took care of one another, supported there families, and raised their children well, would you have the urge to condemn their life style? Would you inherently think they are doing something wrong?
That's kind of a loaded question for a believer. Me putting my faith aside to think in hypotheticals would be like me denying God and His word. The fact is that I HAVE read the bible and I believe His word to be truth. I couldn't imagine my life without ever having read and applied His word. I understand what you're getting at, and I understand the point you're trying to prove but personally I can't put aside my faith to deal in hypotheticals and I hope that no other believer would.
@DoubleR,
I don't want this to be as insulting as it's gong to sound, but there is no other way to put it. You realize that you just siad "I don't want to think", right?
I understand valuing your faith, but to make the blanket decision to never consider things outside of that faith, even as a hypothetical thought exercise, is to put blinders on, and limit the abilities of your own mind (the one your "God" gave you). I don't understand how that could possibly be a good thing.
I think the point is that this is just another one of the "bible rules" that has no basis in reality. Its like the requirement not to mix fibers, avoid shellfish. No one follows those rules anymore. We follow the rules that make sense to any society: murder, theft, battery, libel, public safety. The golden rule as it were. Two adults having a personal relationship is not harming anyone else. Only your religion tells you it is wrong.
Double R
...denying God and His word.
------
I'm honestly curious about this. The bible is "God's word". You believe this, and that's cool. How do you get around the FACTS then, that the bible was written by human beings? Edited numerous times in numerous ways by human beings? The bible's individual works were selected by a grouping of human beings. Other relevant works of the time were left out of the bible, because the grouping of human beings didn't think those works sent the right message. Human beings continue to edit the bible, by offering new versions. The hand of man is all over the bible, every single word. If God is all-powerful as were told, why would his word need to be written by human beings at all? Why wouldn't it just "poof" into existence? Don't bother answering that, there isn't an answer, just maybe ponder it. Further, if it's truly the word of God, why would it need to be edited by men to provide a more appropriate message? Why would men need to leave out writings from the bible, if it's truly the word of God? If it's as holy as you say, man shouldn't touch it at all, because it diminishes any degree of holiness due to the fact that human beings are an exceptionally imperfect species, and anything we touch/create takes on an element of our imperfection. I don't get it.
@DoubleR,
So ask yourself these questions then, since you've read the Bible. Why is being gay raised when it is in the Bible? Why not earlier, like during the earliest parts of the Bible? Why is it first being mentioned when people are in a desert trying to keep the human race alive? Could it be because it's not actually a sin, unless we are fighting for survival? And by acknowledging it at that time, does the Bible not only also confirm it's existence, but confirm that it was NOT an issue prior to the time it was brought up? Why is it that it's called a sin traditionally but the context, timing and reason it's brought up in isn't pondered AT ALL? Why is it that we discard all the passages about slavery, women as property, etc. because we take them in context and realize they no longer apply to society, but for gay people we strictly hold to a passage or two - totally out of context - and refuse to budge? If it were really sin, I think it would have been brought up very early in the Bible, like murder for example. I think it is brought up when it was because that's when it needed to be addressed, for survival purposes, and in that manner also suggests that if we're not in survival mode, it has no reason to be addressed. We need to evolve away from this strict interpretation we selfishly adhere to, and read the passages in context for the actual meaning, instead of condeming this group of people when that's not what's happening in there, not what's happening in sodom and gommorrah (that's rapists being struck down, they just happen to be gay, but being gay isn't what's addressed, rapists of any kind is what is being addressed), etc.
Wrong? Possibly not since that implies a judgement. Perverted? Yes, in the sense that their behavior deviates from the norm.
You folks that keep posting the following are very correct: "The Bible was written by men." Yes, indeedy. Thou hast truly spoken. The Bible says (in either 1Tim.3:15 or 2Tim. 3:15, I am not sure and dont have time to look) -" Holy men of old wrote as they were moved on by the Holy Ghost." So, yes......the Bible readily admits that it is written by MEN. No surprise here for people who choose to believe. I choose to believe. Because I see Him, I hear Him, and I feel Him: I find God everywhere I look.
Son of the south...do you see god in the eyes of the starving children in Africa, or or in the eyes of children losing one of their parents to cancer, ....and if you do... maybe ask your god , as you hear him and see him, what value that adds to humanity.
Son of the South
Holy men of old wrote as they were moved on by the Holy Ghost." So, yes......the Bible readily admits that it is written by MEN. No surprise here for people who choose to believe.
----------
So, God creates heaven and earth, but doesn't bother to create this supposed life manual(bible) himself? Why, I wonder? That would clear things up rather definitively, as to the notion that the christian way is the only way. Wonder if he was unable, or unwilling to craft the book that would serve as "his word"? My guess is unwilling, and that maybe he thought it unecessary. Perhaps he designed us humans to develop differently, per different cultural forces, and knew full well we'd establish our own way of seeing things(religions), and this was just fine with him.