100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: The NO BIBLE ALLOWED Thread can you handle it? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
That statement doesn't even make sense. How can one BELIEVE it, if they know it's not true? That's not believing something for you believe it not to be true. That's only presenting yourself as believing which is then a lie. then let's test if it's true or not ....do you as a Christian believe thast Jesus is the only way to God? Yes I do. Jesus gave his entire life to give us the law between man and God. In the end he died so you would not have to. so that means that you also believe that those that do not accept Jesus as their lord and savior will not get to Heaven and will die? Is not my place to make that judgement. I didn't ask you to make a judgement..I ask you if you believe it to be true Oh but it is a judgement. I may not be judging a specific person in this specific discussion, but making a judgement on weather homosexuals will go to heaven or die is making a judgement on ALL homosexuals. No one knows who will go to heaven or die till the day of judgement, that is entirely up to Jesus at judgement. then it's not true that Jesus died so that others wouldn't have to...whether ones dies or not is a judgement made by God and has nothing to do with accepting Jesus as lord and savior ...is that right? Yes Jesus died so you wouldn't have to. Jesus sacrificed himself into death so you would not have to feel the wrath of our father. So you could enjoy the eternal life in heaven. so that means that you also believe that Jesus died so that all including homosexuals would not feel the wrath of the father and enjoy eternal life in Heaven If they accept Jesus as lord and saviour, then yes. But as Jesus being our lord, he has instructed us that homosexuality is sinful and we are not to do it, therefore if one accepts Jesus as lord and saviour they would then not do the homosexual activities for our lord has told us not to. ok...now all you have to do is provide a passage from the bible where Jesus states that homosexuality is a sin Jesus reveals his stance on homosexuality in Matthew 19.3-6 and Mark 10.2-9. Here, the Pharisees "test" Him. And He quotes Genesis. Therefore, Jesus affirmed the image of God as male/female, man/woman with his quotation of Genesis. Alternative alignments of man/man, woman/woman, etc. reject God's creation and deface the image of God. While Jesus was never recorded as speaking the word "homosexuality," He did define what sexual relationships should be. Source - http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090801021130AAQjUdc Sorry I didn't add it when I originally posted this, wasn't thinking. Sorry didn't mean to make this look like it was my work. I didn't ask you to (google cut and paste) something from a Satan website...I asked you to post a passage from the bible where Jesus specifically states that homosexuality or the likes is a sin you gave this whole sermon that Jesus "instructed" you that it was a sin ....so unless you can provide a passage where Jesus states that it is a sin...then this is an example of you believing something that you know isn't true you are using the Christian religion falsely to judge others unjustly I didn't paste anything from a Satan site lol. I gave referance of Jesus telling us how it should be. Jesus may never have said anything against homosexuality in exacts. But he taught us how relationships are to be. Why does someone have to be told not to do it? Jesus says that it is to be male/female, why should he go into more detail and say no to male/male and female/female. If some one gives you instructions somewhere, they say go down this street and turn right on maple. To get to your destination you would follow their instructions. Even though they didn't say don't turn left, you know that you are not to turn left but you are to turn right as instructed. if Jesus never gave any reference to homosexuality or the likes...then why did you even mention homosexualitiy unless to judge them yourself all I asked was for you to give a passage from the bible where Jesus states that it is a sin...if you can not do so ....then perhaps you should think about not using the name of Jesus to attack them I'm not attacking anyone. And Jesus gave us the instructions of a relationship. In those instructions, homosexuality was no included. He specifically said male/female. So again with my illustration. If someone tells you to turn right on maple to get to their house, if you go left you'd be in the wrong, you would sin. But if you were obedient and did as you were told you would be obedient and receive the reward of making it to their house as promised. but yet you still fail to provide that passage where Jesus states that homosexuality or the like is a sin so can you refrain from preaching hatred long enough to go find it ... I'm not preaching hatred. And Jesus gave us instructions on how a family is to be set up, therefore if it is outside of those guidelines it is not permitted, therefore a sin. cool...so you can't find a passage....ok..that mean that I can reveal to you what I was really up to...... now as the original post requested... can you discuss why you have a belief that homosexuality is evil without making reference to any religious scriptures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That statement doesn't even make sense. How can one BELIEVE it, if they know it's not true? That's not believing something for you believe it not to be true. That's only presenting yourself as believing which is then a lie. then let's test if it's true or not ....do you as a Christian believe thast Jesus is the only way to God? Yes I do. Jesus gave his entire life to give us the law between man and God. In the end he died so you would not have to. so that means that you also believe that those that do not accept Jesus as their lord and savior will not get to Heaven and will die? Is not my place to make that judgement. I didn't ask you to make a judgement..I ask you if you believe it to be true Oh but it is a judgement. I may not be judging a specific person in this specific discussion, but making a judgement on weather homosexuals will go to heaven or die is making a judgement on ALL homosexuals. No one knows who will go to heaven or die till the day of judgement, that is entirely up to Jesus at judgement. then it's not true that Jesus died so that others wouldn't have to...whether ones dies or not is a judgement made by God and has nothing to do with accepting Jesus as lord and savior ...is that right? Yes Jesus died so you wouldn't have to. Jesus sacrificed himself into death so you would not have to feel the wrath of our father. So you could enjoy the eternal life in heaven. so that means that you also believe that Jesus died so that all including homosexuals would not feel the wrath of the father and enjoy eternal life in Heaven If they accept Jesus as lord and saviour, then yes. But as Jesus being our lord, he has instructed us that homosexuality is sinful and we are not to do it, therefore if one accepts Jesus as lord and saviour they would then not do the homosexual activities for our lord has told us not to. ok...now all you have to do is provide a passage from the bible where Jesus states that homosexuality is a sin Jesus reveals his stance on homosexuality in Matthew 19.3-6 and Mark 10.2-9. Here, the Pharisees "test" Him. And He quotes Genesis. Therefore, Jesus affirmed the image of God as male/female, man/woman with his quotation of Genesis. Alternative alignments of man/man, woman/woman, etc. reject God's creation and deface the image of God. While Jesus was never recorded as speaking the word "homosexuality," He did define what sexual relationships should be. Source - http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090801021130AAQjUdc Sorry I didn't add it when I originally posted this, wasn't thinking. Sorry didn't mean to make this look like it was my work. I didn't ask you to (google cut and paste) something from a Satan website...I asked you to post a passage from the bible where Jesus specifically states that homosexuality or the likes is a sin you gave this whole sermon that Jesus "instructed" you that it was a sin ....so unless you can provide a passage where Jesus states that it is a sin...then this is an example of you believing something that you know isn't true you are using the Christian religion falsely to judge others unjustly I didn't paste anything from a Satan site lol. I gave referance of Jesus telling us how it should be. Jesus may never have said anything against homosexuality in exacts. But he taught us how relationships are to be. Why does someone have to be told not to do it? Jesus says that it is to be male/female, why should he go into more detail and say no to male/male and female/female. If some one gives you instructions somewhere, they say go down this street and turn right on maple. To get to your destination you would follow their instructions. Even though they didn't say don't turn left, you know that you are not to turn left but you are to turn right as instructed. if Jesus never gave any reference to homosexuality or the likes...then why did you even mention homosexualitiy unless to judge them yourself all I asked was for you to give a passage from the bible where Jesus states that it is a sin...if you can not do so ....then perhaps you should think about not using the name of Jesus to attack them I'm not attacking anyone. And Jesus gave us the instructions of a relationship. In those instructions, homosexuality was no included. He specifically said male/female. So again with my illustration. If someone tells you to turn right on maple to get to their house, if you go left you'd be in the wrong, you would sin. But if you were obedient and did as you were told you would be obedient and receive the reward of making it to their house as promised. but yet you still fail to provide that passage where Jesus states that homosexuality or the like is a sin so can you refrain from preaching hatred long enough to go find it ... I'm not preaching hatred. And Jesus gave us instructions on how a family is to be set up, therefore if it is outside of those guidelines it is not permitted, therefore a sin. cool...so you can't find a passage....ok..that mean that I can reveal to you what I was really up to...... now as the original post requested... can you discuss why you have a belief that homosexuality is evil without making reference to any religious scriptures cool.... so I did show a passage on how a family is to be set up. Homosexuality is evil for it has absolutely no pro's besides physical lusting desires. It has no pro's for the world as a whole, we are to fill this earth by no means does homosexuality help with that. Sex is PURELY for reproduction, this can not be done with homosexuality. Homosexuality is purely a physical lust. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not preaching hatred. And Jesus gave us instructions on how a family is to be set up, therefore if it is outside of those guidelines it is not permitted, therefore a sin. According to you and your own personal interpretations of your own chosen religion perhaps. But since you constantly spit in the face of everyone else's religious beliefs you're not spreading love at all but merely religious bigotry, and that's hatred no matter how you cut it. You can't spit in the face of other people's religions and spiritual beliefs and call that love. 
In fact, even you have confessed that not all Christians hold the same values and beliefs that you do. So the personalized version of your own Christianity is just that - your personal interpretation of it. Not spit'n in anyone's face. If they wish to believe something outside the truth, so be it. That is their choice. Doesn't make them any worse of a person, any less intelligent, or anything of such. That is their choice. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cool.... so I did show a passage on how a family is to be set up. Homosexuality is evil for it has absolutely no pro's besides physical lusting desires. It has no pro's for the world as a whole, we are to fill this earth by no means does homosexuality help with that. Sex is PURELY for reproduction, this can not be done with homosexuality. Homosexuality is purely a physical lust. so that means that you believe that those that can not bear or sire children should not have sex? ..is that right? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not spit'n in anyone's face. If they wish to believe something outside the truth, so be it. That is their choice. Doesn't make them any worse of a person, any less intelligent, or anything of such. That is their choice. Outside of truth? That's not just spit my friend, that's a snot-filled hawker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cool.... so I did show a passage on how a family is to be set up. Homosexuality is evil for it has absolutely no pro's besides physical lusting desires. It has no pro's for the world as a whole, we are to fill this earth by no means does homosexuality help with that. Sex is PURELY for reproduction, this can not be done with homosexuality. Homosexuality is purely a physical lust. so that means that you believe that those that can not bear or sire children should not have sex? ..is that right? Yep this is what he believes, he has said as much on a separate thread here, to the point of even thinking that married couples who are past their childbearing years shouldn't have sex either. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no god as well as no spirits..
Verify your beliefs before discussion.. *sigh plebeians |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no god as well as no spirits.. Verify your beliefs before discussion.. *sigh plebeians That could depend entirely on the semantics that a person accepts for those terms. If a person defines "spirit" as simply any sentient consciousness that is aware of it's existence, then humans are verification that spirit exists. If a person defines "god" to be the sum total of all sentient consciousness, or the very essences of anything that can experience such consciousness, then the essence of the universe qualifies as "god". Moreover, the verification of these things have at least plausible merit has already been well-established by the science of physics and the logical formalism of mathematics. Of course none of this supports any Zeus-like or biblical-like egotistical "god" since such a god is actually supposed to be separate from sentient beings anyway. So this line of reasoning wouldn't apply to that scenario. Moreover, the fables that describe those kinds of jealous egotistical gods is in dire self-contradiction anyway, so they have no merit in any case. In other words, a Panenthistic view of god and spirit is more than rational and its plausibility has indeed been verified by the modern sciences. Of course that doesn't make it fact, it only gives it plausibility. But the plausibility of a thing is within the scope of rational as well as scientific reasoning. In other words, it can serve as a valid scientific hypothesis awaiting either verification, or proof that it has no plausibility. But since neither of those things has yet been established, then it's a valid topic for discussion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cool.... so I did show a passage on how a family is to be set up. Homosexuality is evil for it has absolutely no pro's besides physical lusting desires. It has no pro's for the world as a whole, we are to fill this earth by no means does homosexuality help with that. Sex is PURELY for reproduction, this can not be done with homosexuality. Homosexuality is purely a physical lust. so that means that you believe that those that can not bear or sire children should not have sex? ..is that right? Yep this is what he believes, he has said as much on a separate thread here, to the point of even thinking that married couples who are past their childbearing years shouldn't have sex either. yes Cowboy has once again painted himself into a corner....if he say that it's ok for married couple beyond childbearing age to have sex...then that would mean that he is preaching hatred only against homosexuals .... if he claim that no one beyond child bearing age should have sex then he is giving those beyond childbearing age the title of "OBSOLETE" with no redeeming value to society if he claim that they do have redeeming value then he must also claim the same for homosexuals or he will once again be preaching hate this is so exciting I can't wait for his response .....but for some odd reason he always seem to disappear when he gets into these situations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cool.... so I did show a passage on how a family is to be set up. Homosexuality is evil for it has absolutely no pro's besides physical lusting desires. It has no pro's for the world as a whole, we are to fill this earth by no means does homosexuality help with that. Sex is PURELY for reproduction, this can not be done with homosexuality. Homosexuality is purely a physical lust. so that means that you believe that those that can not bear or sire children should not have sex? ..is that right? Yep this is what he believes, he has said as much on a separate thread here, to the point of even thinking that married couples who are past their childbearing years shouldn't have sex either. yes Cowboy has once again painted himself into a corner....if he say that it's ok for married couple beyond childbearing age to have sex...then that would mean that he is preaching hatred only against homosexuals .... if he claim that no one beyond child bearing age should have sex then he is giving those beyond childbearing age the title of "OBSOLETE" with no redeeming value to society if he claim that they do have redeeming value then he must also claim the same for homosexuals or he will once again be preaching hate this is so exciting I can't wait for his response .....but for some odd reason he always seem to disappear when he gets into these situations Funches is correct. Sex outside of child barring is lustful desire. I've failed at this don't get me wrong. I pray for forgiveness of my trespasses. But nevertheless sex is for child barring, anything outside of that is fleshly lust for the physical pleasure of sex. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
CowboyGH
on
Wed 01/05/11 07:47 AM
|
|
There is no god as well as no spirits.. Verify your beliefs before discussion.. *sigh plebeians I'll verify God's existence if you verify completely 100% that there is absolutely no God. Even science doesn't absolutely completely indefinitely rule out God. That is why it's called the "THEORY" of evolution. A theory is nothing more then an educated guess. It has some evidence of what the theory is for, but nothing 100% complete. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funches is correct. Sex outside of child barring is lustful desire. I've failed at this don't get me wrong. but Cowboy... if you had lustful sex wouldn't that make you a hypocrite of your sexual beliefs and also place your lustful desires in the same position as a homosexual...er..(no pun intended) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I pray for forgiveness of my trespasses But nevertheless sex is for child barring, anything outside of that is fleshly lust for the physical pleasure of sex.
but you still have not explain why fleshly lustful sex for married couples beyond child bearring age is wrong |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funches is correct. Sex outside of child barring is lustful desire. I've failed at this don't get me wrong. but Cowboy... if you had lustful sex wouldn't that make you a hypocrite of your sexual beliefs and also place your lustful desires in the same position as a homosexual...er..(no pun intended) Yes it would if I continued to do it, that is why I put in which I pray for forgiveness of my failures which you gladly left out of your quoting. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I pray for forgiveness of my trespasses But nevertheless sex is for child barring, anything outside of that is fleshly lust for the physical pleasure of sex.
but you still have not explain why fleshly lustful sex for married couples beyond child bearring age is wrong You had the answer in your question. Because it's fleshly lust. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I pray for forgiveness of my trespasses But nevertheless sex is for child barring, anything outside of that is fleshly lust for the physical pleasure of sex.
but you still have not explain why fleshly lustful sex for married couples beyond child bearring age is wrong You had the answer in your question. Because it's fleshly lust. Heaven forbid a couple actually ENJOY each other. Oh how horrible, a married couple in love with each other enjoying the others body. Do you realize how crazy this is? Are you gonna tell us we can't enjoy it even in the process of having kids too?? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bumblebee11 wrote:
More and more people are finally realizing that these books about God, without God having anything to do with them, screw up more than they fix. Their purpose is to solidify somebody's belief system and is used to fortify their positions, whatever they are. All BOOKS about God are that way. God wrote nothing. He's too intelligent. Thank you for this post ! That is which I try to reach by my questions and debates abt God. That people are far from God because they follow books written by people and serving not people's need to know God but only institutions which are too pragmatic and too far from God. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funches is correct. Sex outside of child barring is lustful desire. I've failed at this don't get me wrong. but Cowboy... if you had lustful sex wouldn't that make you a hypocrite of your sexual beliefs and also place your lustful desires in the same position as a homosexual...er..(no pun intended) Yes it would if I continued to do it, that is why I put in which I pray for forgiveness of my failures which you gladly left out of your quoting. didn't you pray before you place yourself in the same position as a homosexual ....apparently it didn't do any good before hand (no pun intended)...that's why I didn't mention it |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I pray for forgiveness of my trespasses But nevertheless sex is for child barring, anything outside of that is fleshly lust for the physical pleasure of sex.
but you still have not explain why fleshly lustful sex for married couples beyond child bearring age is wrong You had the answer in your question. Because it's fleshly lust. but you didn't explain what wrong with lustful sex especially since there are lots of things that married couples do together that do not bear Children ...so why did you single out lustful sex as being wrong |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I pray for forgiveness of my trespasses But nevertheless sex is for child barring, anything outside of that is fleshly lust for the physical pleasure of sex.
but you still have not explain why fleshly lustful sex for married couples beyond child bearring age is wrong You had the answer in your question. Because it's fleshly lust. Heaven forbid a couple actually ENJOY each other. Oh how horrible, a married couple in love with each other enjoying the others body. Do you realize how crazy this is? Are you gonna tell us we can't enjoy it even in the process of having kids too?? The creating a life is the greatest feeling ever, nothing compares to such an action. The two people know that the baby is there living flesh and blood, that they conceived that child in a night of great love making. What more is there? What greater pleasure could top that? |
|
|
|
|
