Speaking of our next generation of kids, they'll likely be the first ones to know it as a normal practice, which I think will be brilliant! BUT!!! I suppose there will still be Homophobic parents who will pass on their idiotic and disgusting views to their kids.
Though - hopefully - those kids will make their own mind up and realise that it's a good thing and that their parents are being bigoted twats %)
The bible says i can sell my daughter for 50 pieces of silver and i can (and should) beat my slave with a rod, as long as he is still alive 3 days later.
Disappointing response, GoS. Rickolasnice has a bible-hate complex; or just hasn't read it properly - or maybe doesn't want to read it properly because he has a bible hate complex...
(Gal.5:3,4) "If You Follow The Israelite Law, Christ Has Become Useless To You"
Romans 7:7, "I would not have known sin except through the Law."
1 Timothy 1:9,10, " …we know that the Law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the Law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine…"
(Eph.2:15), Followers of Christ are not under the Law of Moses: "He did away with the law of the commandments in regulations"
John 1:17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.
However, Jesus and His disciples did not observe the strict scribal rules against doing any work on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:1-14, Mark 2:23-28, 3:1-6, Luke 6:1-11, 13:10-17, 14:1-6, John 5:1-18). Neither did they perform the ritual hand washings before eating (Matthew 15:1-2). In contrast to the dietary rules of the Law, Jesus said no food can defile a person; it is bad attitudes and actions that can make a person unholy (Matthew 15:1-20, Mark 7:1-23). Jesus frequently criticized the scribal laws (Matthew 23:23, Mark 7:11-13) and some aspects of the civil law (John 8:3-5, 10-11).
Disappointing response, GoS. Rickolasnice has a bible-hate complex; or just hasn't read it properly - or maybe doesn't want to read it properly because he has a bible hate complex...
(Gal.5:3,4) "If You Follow The Israelite Law, Christ Has Become Useless To You"
Romans 7:7, "I would not have known sin except through the Law."
1 Timothy 1:9,10, " …we know that the Law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the Law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine…"
(Eph.2:15), Followers of Christ are not under the Law of Moses: "He did away with the law of the commandments in regulations"
John 1:17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.
Getting it yet? Or will you, again, selectively ignore all this and forever hold your outdated, ignorant opinion... as it suits your biases.
Outdated and ignorant opinion???? LOL... come on Raas ( ← spelt correctly ) your opinion is over 2000 years old...
You're like EADDs version of Dot Cotton with the Bible quotes. You can quote as many as you like but they're meaningless to the majority of us, just words.
Heres a quote from my Bible.
Richard Dawkins 2:7[\B] There is something infantile in the presumption that somebody else has a responsibility to give your life meaning and point… The truly adult view, by contrast, is that our life is as meaningful, as full and as wonderful as we choose to make it.
(Gal.5:3,4) "If You Follow The Israelite Law, Christ Has Become Useless To You"
Romans 7:7, "I would not have known sin except through the Law."
1 Timothy 1:9,10, " …we know that the Law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the Law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine…"
(Eph.2:15), Followers of Christ are not under the Law of Moses: "He did away with the law of the commandments in regulations"
John 1:17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.
Or several other passages, though I'm sure non-Christians get the picture.
It's obviously not adultery, is it? Otherwise the mention of adultery would be redundant. What exactly is it? And why are the scriptures so keen to proscribe it?
Maybe Romans 1:7 will shed a little light on Christian sexual mores:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind*,
*Note that the translation of 'abusers of themselves with men' from the original Greek has also been translated as 'Sodomites' or 'men who go to bed with men'.
And that's only scratching the surface.
Do you think your church would welcome a gay wedding, Raas? Serious question.
raas.. please tell me at what point in the bible it mentions acts of sexuality being an abomination..
What did Jesus teach on homosexuality?
You getting the point of my post, yet?
Christians think that God thinks man on man action is icky because of the old testament, not the new. When using the old testament to base your beliefs and morals on, you're gonna have a bad time.. Same situation with abortion.. It's pretty much an OT thing.. you know.. the story where a talking snake was more persuasive that an all powerful god.. come on you know the one raas.. the one where god, being the all loving kinda thing he is, decided to flood the earth bar Noah and his family and 2 (or 6? of some? I can't remember) of every animal with a huge flood.. So if we have Noah and his wife, his sons and their wives.. Incest party!
And seriously what's with the little bios and introductions aimed at others in response to my posts?
raas i have a new question for you.. along with some important information.. over in the theology thread..
Now, Sammy. It might just be your primitive understanding of the bible. Or you may have deliberately avoided this answer, as it does not serve some anti-religion bias you hold, and you've subsequently formed a warped, unrealistic perception of the Bible; I'm not sure. But let me try to correct your misunderstanding here -
(Not trying to be condescending here, generally trying to help)
Rickolasnice also, despite bringing this up many times you don't appear to understand also, and anyone else shocked at the vulgarity in the Bible... Here is a researched answer:
The Bible started off thousands of years ago, in a civilisation very different than our own. A basic knowledge of Canaanite culture reveals its inherent moral wickedness. The Canaanites were brutal, aggressive people who engaged in bestiality, incest, and even child sacrifice. Deviant sexual acts were the norm.
God and his good virtues became intertwined with their culture, hence all the brutal verses and their tyrant-like depiction of Him.
God is not an evil tyrant as he was portrayed. This was demonstrated time and time again, by Jesus, who defied the "old law". One instance, being when he was ordered to stone a woman who had sexually sinned (As the law stated), Jesus, representing God, of course disobeyed this "Lest he who is without sin cast the first stone". Many other times did Jesus deliberately disobey this brutal, old law.
The Bible is a book that has faults - admits to them - and later corrects them.
For instance, when Jesus corrected the Old Testament verse "You have heard it say eye for eye, tooth for tooth":
Matthew 5:38"You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' 39"But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also"
The Bible shows a logical progression in mans understanding of God, culminating in Jesus Christ in the new testament.
It's very simple and clear how it works and what it's aim is. Problem is now, for people who oppose Christianity and have a bias against the religion, this simple explanation does not serve their biases so they selectively forget the New testament corrections and keep quoting these brutal old testament verses in an attempt to defame the Christian God.
Just like aforementioned rickolasnice
Rickolasnice said:
The bible says i can sell my daughter for 50 pieces of silver and i can (and should) beat my slave with a rod, as long as he is still alive 3 days later
And Sammy's own perception "The Bible is so ambiguous it can wiggle out of anything", just reads as if you're wiggling your way out of accepting it's clear aim and meaning, as it does not serve your own bias.
___________
Now, once you've digested this, boys, I'll move on to sexual deviance and the perversity of homosexuality. I'm now off to the theology thread to further remonstrate that naughty Rickolasnice some more.
______________________________
Oh, and ScotchMist
ScotchMist said:
You're like EADDs version of Dot Cotton with the Bible quotes. You can quote as many as you like but they're meaningless to the majority of us, just words.
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
the one where god, being the all loving kinda thing he is, decided to flood the earth bar Noah and his family and 2 (or 6? of some? I can't remember) of every animal with a huge flood.. So if we have Noah and his wife, his sons and their wives.. Incest party!
What the fuck are you talking about? You're the one who's completely avoided the questions I put to you about the Christian teachings regarding 'sexual immorality', and particularly the explicit condemnation of the 'effeminate' and 'men who lust after men'.
The Bible started off thousands of years ago, in a civilisation very different than our own. A basic knowledge of Canaanite culture reveals its inherent moral wickedness. The Canaanites were brutal, aggressive people who engaged in bestiality, incest, and even child sacrifice. Deviant sexual acts were the norm.
But I'm not addressing pre-Christian writings, am I? My quotes are taken entirely from the New Testament, and thus represent Christian teachings. Some were written many years after the supposed lifetime of Christ.
Care to actually address the points in my post instead of hitting me with irrelevant, tangential waffle? Or shall I start calling you Mister Smokes Blunts?
The Lounge Mod, has just gone fucking mental .... at least 7 post of gay hate. I know he's a sundayschool teacher but he's coming off like a westboro fruitloop.
I'm dead serious.. I don't need anybody's cool/respect points. it goes against nature and it's destructive to society to force people to act like everything is okay. they aren't hurting anybody? what about the moral fabric of society?
I'm sick of having all that crap paraded up and down in front of decent people. I'm tired of all those fag flag flying fruitcakes marching around demanding rights that were intended to benifit normal families. fuck them. I think they should all go back to being ashamed of themselves.
Er...don't any of those quotes break the BLUA? I must admit I've never read it, so I don't know, but fuck. You can't go posting shit like that as a mod can you?
Can you??
PS "Goes against nature". LOL etc. Coz the human race is sooooo good at working with nature isn't it.
At first, I thought 'this guy's on the wind-up. Huh-huh. Good one'.
Then I realised that not only was the target audience The Lounge (not known for its grasp or appreciation of even the most crude forms of satire) but the guy spelt benefit as 'benifit'.
Those poor Sunday school kids are going to grow up to be illiterate and backward. 8(
there are a couple of openly gay prolific gay poster in TL tho ... faggot, fag is lounge language and they participate in that as much as the rest but the guys gone nuts.
Roger&Me, one of the best members there, intellgent and witty went on a bit of a rant the other morning about every religion known, and deleted his posts, I hope he comes back cuz he'd make a great mod
I just don't give a shit about what a Lounge mod says, unless he's posting in this thread.
If he posted in this thread, fine. He's part of the discussion then. You copying his posts to this forum and inviting people to air their discontent here is pointless and childish, and contributes nothing to the existing discussion.
So one Lounge mod is a homophobe? Okay. What has that got to do with the legality of gay marriage in the UK?
) your opinion is over 2000 years old...
