|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Gay Marriage as an attack on Christianity | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
quote: First the Jerusalem Council. You say that the issue was to "resolve" the problems the Jews had with gentiles. That problem was circumcision - first and foremost. Read chapter 15 without your blinders on. Get the circumcision part in your head. They Jews were the ones that had to compromise. It didn't really hold up because James and Peter still were circumcising gentiles (see Galatians 2). Read Acts 16.
quote: South Galatian setting. Paul circumcised the gentile Timothy just to avoid inflaming the Jewish Christians. James sent emissaries to make sure gentiles were circumcised in Galatia. See Galatians. You desperately want to avoid the implications that the kosher foods rules were a fundamental eternal law, so you have to keep inventing this issue that it was "just a rule to avoid offending Jews". Circumcision was that issue. (see Acts 21!) And what does fornication have to do with any sort of Jewish Christian verses Gentile Christian dichotomy that you and Roman empire Christians dreamed up anyway? NEXT ISSUE As for the Arian issue, know that most bishops (even though Goths were excluded from participating in addition to Manicheans and Marcionites plus scores of others) in the 4th century were Arians. I am short for time, but the Councils were pro-Arius after Nicea
quote: It was only after 380 that the Orthodox Trinity view was decided on and it was a power play by a biased Emperor. First Council of Constantinople - Wikipedia
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Please stop the rudeness.
This is too much to deal with, I can only skim it. Circumcision was the inciting cause. When the Jewish Council in Jerusalem understood that God was doing mighty acts among the Gentiles they realized they shouldn't put unnecessary burdens on the Gentiles, but nevertheless chose some observances to ask them to follow for the sake of fellowship. Yes they gave up circumcision. They COULD have given up all of it because none of it was required of believers in Christ, so the only reason they made it necessary was for the sake of fellowship. They are under grace, there is no more requirement to obey the Law, so the only reason they asked even a few things was to avoid offending the Jews. You can stop arguing and berating me about this. We disagree, leave it at that. Yes Paul circumcised Timothy for the sake of not offending the Jews, but remember, Timothy had a Jewish mother so circumcision would have been appropriate in his case. I suspect you are misreading Galatians 2 where you claim Peter and James were circumcising Gentiles because no such thing is going on. They are sent as apostles to "the circumcision," which means to the Jews, while Paul was sent to "the uncircumcision" which means to the Gentiles. I suspect you are misreading this. The Jewish food laws were clearly shown to Peter in a vision in Acts 10 to no longer be in force, after which he was sent to take the gospel to the Gentile centurion Cornelius. I don't personally have any desire in the matter one way or another, all that matters is what the Bible says and God clearly lifted the dietary laws when the gospel went out to the Gentiles. I'm simply not up to reading all the stuff you wrote after that. Please cease your bullying. Thank you. ALSO THERE IS NO RELATION BETWEEN THIS TOPIC AND GAY MARRIAGE THAT I CAN SEE. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
When I said I haven't read the Bible, I was attempting to quote another poster, but it came out the wrong way. Anyway, sorry for the confusion and let me set the record straight by saying I've done my share of Bible reading.
----------------------- My thoughts about equality certainly aren't de rigueur forCatholics - it seems to me most Catholics are too spiritually apathetic or corrupt to notice such things. Mainstream Catholicism (as opposed to true Catholicism) has become dominated by cultural Marxism since the 1960's, so it tends to worship equality and not be suspicious of it, like me. Christianity used to the official religion of Western civilisation. But along came the devil and his so-called Enlightenment, and now, Equality has usurped Christianity as the official religion of Western civilisation. The Antichrist, when he comes, will ride in on the back of this religion of Equality, imo. As pointed out in Romans 1, sexual and intellectual corruption are symptoms of spiritual corruption. The Catholic Church has become seriously spiritual corrupt and the sexual corruption that results from this is well known. The accompanying intellectual corruption comes in the forms of Marxism, Darwinism and inter-faith dialogue (all products of the Enlightenment, surprise, surprise). A relatively new form of corruption can be added to this list - environmentalism. Same-sex marriage is a perfect example of how Satan can deceive the gullible masses by using a nice word like equality. (If you want to trick someone into swallowing poison, you disguise it by coating it with chocolate.)------------------------------------- I am aware of certain accusations made by Protestants down through the ages, many of which still exist. If you ask me, four of the last five Popes (Ratzinger wasn't too bad) have been taken theChurch down the wrong road. I am not at all keen on the current Pope (Francis). Some of the things he's said and done are extremely suspect and I don't trust him. And the fact that the Loony Left liberals in the Church and the mainstream media are enamoured of him is certainly a bad omen.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
You say "charity and empathy is (are) the essence of communism". Tell that to the literally hundreds of millions of people who lost their lives at the hands of Communists in the twentieth century, not to mention the untold millions of dissenters who were tortured, imprisoned and impoverished.
----------------------------------------- The book of Acts indicates that the core of the early Christians in Jerusalem formed a communal society. But I don't think there's any evidence that suggests this style of living is compulsory for followers of Christ. Communal societies might work for small groups of intimately close friends, but they don't seem to work too well for large groups of human beings. As the early Church grew in size, it probably became apparent that communal living wasn't going to work as a general rule, so it was largely abandoned ... but not entirely - notice that for millennia, Catholic monasteries and convents and the like, which involve small groups of devoted Christians, have adopted the communal system similar to that which existed in the very early Church.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
I think it can be argued that abortion is murder without resorting to religion: If your mother aborted you while you were in the womb, would you be alive today? No, you wouldn't, so abortion is clearly the termination of a human life. Therefore, to terminate a foetus is to terminate a human life. The premeditated and cold-blooded termination of an (innocent) human life is murder, isn't it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Nope. Murder is the killing human beings. Termination of pregnacy is not murder. No religion involved.
And, gay marriages do not have anyting to do with abortion. Try to stay on the subject. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Again, you are simply showing your ignorance. Yes, dictators and tyrants and even democratically elected Presidents can commit genocide and no group has ever been as efficient at genocide as Christianity; but that is not communism.
But you and Faith still need to show any evidence that Gay Marriage as an attack on Christianity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
I think it can be argued that abortion is murder without resorting to religion: If your mother aborted you while you were in the womb, would you be alive today? I think it can argued that a miscarriage is involuntary manslaughter. I think it can be argued that using condoms is a conspiracy to commit murder. Yeah, you can argue all of those things. But your arguments should not be taken seriously. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Dredge writes:
So, if abortion is murder, do you advocate capital punishment for women who have abortions? Or just imprisonment?
... abortion is clearly the termination of a human life. Therefore, to terminate a foetus is to terminate a human life. The premeditated and cold-blooded termination of an (innocent) human life is murder, isn't it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
Dredge writes
I think it can be argued that abortion is murder without resorting to religion: If your mother aborted you while you were in the womb, would you be alive today? No, you wouldn't, so abortion is clearly the termination of a human life. Therefore, to terminate a foetus is to terminate a human life. The premeditated and cold-blooded termination of an (innocent) human life is murder, isn't it. Remember Dredge, these fellas and gals make up morality as they go along. What is wrong today might be right tomorrow. As a matter of fact, thier doctrine of survival of the fittest and natural selection demands that it could not be otherwise. Logically and rationally they have no other recourse It seems they are not even smart enough to recognize, that while they actually acknowledge that actual RIGHT and WRONG cannot and does not actually exist, in thier naturalistic enviornment, they are still willing to speak of subjective morality. This alone should shock even the simplest of minds, as irrational and absurd. Yet they proceed onward as if this presents no problem logically and rationally Ignorance is bliss, so to speak So hoping as you are and trying to get them to see that abortion is actually murder, would be like trying to convince someone that the holocaust actually happened, when they firmly believe it did not They deal in simplicity of the mind and wilful ignorance. It keeps them happy and let's them do whatever they imagine. You will never convince these fellas and gals they are wrong but you can show the people that are reading along, they are actually wrong, if you keep things basic and completely logical. This is where they fall apart, nearly ever time Dawn Bertot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
Google
Women are treated as a man's property. He gets the "choice" to consider the fetus for whatever it is.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
Pope welcomes world's only gay leader and his husband to the Vatican
"The Vatican welcomed Xavier Bettel and his husband like any other married couple" Did the Pope just welcome an attack on Christianity? Or does this not count because Catholics aren't Christians?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
quote: The earliest Acts manuscripts have "blood" as representing murder of humans and these 200 A.D. texts are seen as "moral" by all scholars (it removed "strangulation" or "what is strangled" all together to take food out of it, then added in a negative version of the Golden Rule "do not do to others what you wouldn't want done to you"). You keep ignoring "fornication". Your argument would work (perhaps?) if circumcision was included part of the commands for gentiles and if it was clearly stated to be about not offending people instead of being presented as Post-Easter commands to follow. And you still have the fornication problem.
quote: He was an uncircumcised gentile who was never in any way Jewish. Scripture said that his Gentile father was the issue, and Jewish Christians would have asked to see his penis to make sure he was really part of The Way.
quote: See what it says. Pay attention to 2:12,2:14, and all of 3.
quote: See Genesis 15 for the covenant promise (Palestine and Syrian land) and the 400 year prediction. Genesis 17 is the circumcision "covenant". Exodus 12 says a stranger (Gentile!) must be circumcised to partake of the Passover meal.
quote: Nope. Acts 10:28 said it was about uncircumcised gentiles NOT FOOD! Your claim of "clearly lifting the dietary laws" is absurd since Peter was confused about the vision from the get go until he met the Italian. Then it was about calling uncircumcised gentiles common or profane. Ceremonially unclean for the feasts. You yourself said the feasts were ceremonies that are no longer required. The Acts 15 decision stated that the covenant applied to all mankind (see 15:15-19) and not just Israel and it had NOTHING to do with the land of Palestine and circumcision. The Lords Supper is a parallel to the Passover though. Romans 12
quote: See 1 Corinthians 10:16 and 11:23-26. You yourself said ceremonial clean ness was no longer an issue. Gentiles are no longer "dogs" or "pigs". they are not profane or ceremonially unclean. They are sacred and worthy of ritual slaughter. Peter! Slaughter and eat! Acts 10:28 says it is about gentiles.
quote: Because "all the stuff ...after that" showed that the "Church" that brought us the Councils, the decisions of which you hold to be the very fabric of (your) "Christianity", were made up of nothing more(or less) than Bishops appointed by the Roman Emperor. We (now!)know what you mean by a STRICTLY CHURCH MATTER end quote. The Roman Empire Christianity that you hold dear is strictly between you and the Roman Empire. That is where you get your views that demand a government to outlaw same-sex marriage. Your (churchish) Empire did it in 342.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
quote: Here is the word definition for Soma or body. The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon Strong's Number: 4983 Browse Lexicon Original Word Word Originsoma from (4982) Transliterated Word TDNT Entry Soma Definition1. the body both of men or animals a. a dead body or corpse b. the living body 1. of animals 2. the bodies of planets and of stars (heavenly bodies)3. is used of a (large or small) number of men closely united into one society, or family as it were; a social, ethical, mystical body a. so in the NT of the church 4. that which casts a shadow as distinguished from the shadow itself Soma Meaning in Bible - New Testament Greek Lexicon - New American Standard Romans 12:1 again
quote: 1 Corinthians 10:16, 11:23-26, and Colossians cover this issue.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Okay, I'll consider you an automaton just following the Supreme Court's protocols. Sure. And I'll consider you to be a person who makes up bad definitions on the fly. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024