DeletedUser
Religion itself is a side-track. Meh.
Quite hoenstly, belief in god is for the gullible.
- Status
Religion itself is a side-track. Meh.
Quite hoenstly, belief in god is for the gullible.
DeletedUser
I believe that it is a railroad track...Without any shins(if i got this spelled correctly wich I doubt)
It has a road,but at the end you will fall..
It has a road,but at the end you will fall..
DeletedUser
Numbers 5:12-28
12 "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: 'If a man's wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him 13 by sleeping with another man, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure—or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure- 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephah of barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder offering to draw attention to guilt.
16 " 'The priest shall bring her and have her stand before the LORD. 17 Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. 18 After the priest has had the woman stand before the LORD, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. 19 Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, "If no other man has slept with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. 20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have defiled yourself by sleeping with a man other than your husband"- 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse of the oath-"may the LORD cause your people to curse and denounce you when he causes your thigh to waste away and your abdomen to swell. [b] 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells and your thigh wastes away. [c] " Then the woman is to say, "Amen. So be it."
23 " 'The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall have the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water will enter her and cause bitter suffering. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the LORD and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has defiled herself and been unfaithful to her husband, then when she is made to drink the water that brings a curse, it will go into her and cause bitter suffering; her abdomen will swell and her thigh waste away, and she will become accursed among her people. 28 If, however, the woman has not defiled herself and is free from impurity, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.
Abortion, the process described and recommended, in the Bible.
DeletedUser
Why would you doubt that?
It's written in the bible, right there in those pages, so it MUST be true right?
How do you know he's torturing billions more in Hell? If you believe that Hell exists, because it's written so in the good book, then you must believe that God has murdered over 2 million people, as that is written in the same book!
It's seems a fallacy for one of the ten commandments to be 'thou shalt not kill', when the divine being is doing just that! Lead by example I say
*gasp*
Haven't you heard of people selling their souls to the devil!
DeletedUser
first off thats not abortion
secondly its irrelevent to eh point at hand
in fact it only argues in favor of my statement that abortion is NOT a religous debate its a MORAL debate with people arguing the MORALITY of abortion and weather or not its murder
DeletedUser3543
If God is almighty, and his wish is always granted - like protecting people and keeping them safe - why does his number one man on Earth [The Pope], feel the need to travel round in a bulletproof car?
Surely God would keep him safe if that is his wish.
If it isn't his wish and The Pope is meant to be assassinated, then surely The Pope is defying the word of God and will go straight to Hell??
Surely God would keep him safe if that is his wish.
If it isn't his wish and The Pope is meant to be assassinated, then surely The Pope is defying the word of God and will go straight to Hell??
DeletedUser
the pope is the head of the CATHOLIC faith not all chrsitanity and not all religion there is no NUMBER ONE MAN of god
and the bible specificaly mentions in multple areas scripture on it being perfectly acceptable to defend onesself
DeletedUser
(( Please stay on topic --- "Proof of God" fallacies ))
DeletedUser
Doing something to your body to cause a fetus to leave prematurely is not abortion?
Wow, you are in one hell of a state of denial.
DeletedUser
Sorry, but I think that spider is actually right for once, although I'm not entirely sure.
Here's the tricky part of understanding: 27 If she has defiled herself and been unfaithful to her husband, then when she is made to drink the water that brings a curse, it will go into her and cause bitter suffering; her abdomen will swell and her thigh waste away, and she will become accursed among her people. Her thigh will shrink, and she will become fat and swelled (with pregnancy), and pain from childbearing. It does NOT say she will not be pregnant or that he baby will die or anything.
So what I think that its saying is that the priest will use the concotion to see if she is pregnant or not. If she is then she is obviously humilated and insulted by the townpeople. If not then she's fine. It doesn't mention that a baby/fetus is killed.
DeletedUser
Which is already known, and really unimportant to say. I'm sure everyone here has heard of different sects of Christianity. Though last thread you did try to lump all atheists into one group, and were angered when someone said they weren't all the same. :/
You're making up most of the disrespect, and shelling it back out. But its cool if you're the one doing it eh?
I had so much more to say about that paragraph, but hellstrom took it all already D:.
1Anyways, Im a minister you see, and im perfectly fine with marrying homosexual couples. And so is my church... what happens then?
2. Finally, which earth do you live on, and how does one go about getting there? And what the sort of equal rights do religious people not have? They arent some poor oppressed minority group with no defense in the lawmaking area.
DeletedUser
DeletedUser
sadly i agree
while biblicly its not a christians place to judge a person homesexual or not its also unchristian to support behaivor recognized as sin
it would be like a christan saying its ok to murder or steal or commit adultry
weather or not you personaly agre or disagree with it if your a christian minister then you would follow gods law as laid out int eh bible meaning you do not support sinning behaivor like homosexuality
( note this isnt my beleif tht it is sin only pointing out the christian view)
DeletedUser
Actually, the bible refers to sodomy, not homosexuality. Modern interpretation, from fundamentalist and bible distortionists, has resulted in stating that sodomy with a woman is okay, but not homosexuality.
Let's see if you two can just accept the fact you're demonstrating prejudice.
Let's see if you two can just accept the fact you're demonstrating prejudice.
DeletedUser
DeletedUser
(See the "no true Scotsman" fallacy)
Darfkwahn - you are more of a christian than many who stick that label on themselves as an excuse for their own nastiness. I don't recall reading in the Bible that Jesus hated gays - in fact I don't recall him hating anyone much in particular, so maybe those who hate in Jesus' name should take on a bit of his humility and feel ashamed.
DeletedUser
i CLEARLY stated that its not he place of a christian to judge or hate homosexuals but as its considered a sin its something there not supposed to condone therefore marrying them would be
but jsut to clear a few things up for hells absurd statement that he bible doesnt say homosexuaity is a sin
"Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Leviticus 18:29 For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off from among their people.
Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." ( and before people scream about the last part of that verse the put to death part is a refernce to the destruction of sodom and gaomora its not saying all homosexuals shall be put to death there jsut one in long line of people listed in that case)
there are several others but im not gonna post a huge litany of scripture esspecialy since my point is clearly proven
DeletedUser
No, you clearly have not read the Christians scriptures, where it says that those who will not inherit God's Kingdom include "men who lie with men" If you don't think that means today's modern term, "homosexual", then talking to you is only an aggravation.
How so? the Bible condemns homosexuality, what point do you have?
James says that your works prove your faith, if your works are not condusive to your proclaimed faith, then you are not of such faith.
If a person claimed to be an atheist, but said there has to be a divine being, then he couldn't be an atheist.
The same is true, if a person claims to be Christian, he/she must follow Christian teachings.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
I'm interested that lspiderl thought that my comment might have included him/her.
He/she is right that the bible proscribes (male) homosexuality though. Both the Old Testament and St Paul display a good dose of homophobia. Jesus, on the contrary, never pronounces on it. In spite of excluding large sections of society from his promised kingdom (those who judge, the rich etc.) he does not make any pronouncement on sexuality. In view of his general tolerance towards such hate-figures as tax-collectors, prostitutes, gentiles (Samaritans) and others, it's reasonable to assume that his attitude towards them would have been one of acceptance.
Of course, if you take the OT literally, then practising homosexuals will not be admitted to heaven - in fact, only exteremely orthodox Jews may meet the entry criteria. I guess anyone who is reading this can consider thmselves definitely excluded then.
He/she is right that the bible proscribes (male) homosexuality though. Both the Old Testament and St Paul display a good dose of homophobia. Jesus, on the contrary, never pronounces on it. In spite of excluding large sections of society from his promised kingdom (those who judge, the rich etc.) he does not make any pronouncement on sexuality. In view of his general tolerance towards such hate-figures as tax-collectors, prostitutes, gentiles (Samaritans) and others, it's reasonable to assume that his attitude towards them would have been one of acceptance.
Of course, if you take the OT literally, then practising homosexuals will not be admitted to heaven - in fact, only exteremely orthodox Jews may meet the entry criteria. I guess anyone who is reading this can consider thmselves definitely excluded then.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
No, he preached to them, he did not approve of them "those healthy do not need a physician, only the ailing do." And so your telling me that just because you dont agree with one part of the Bible that you discredit it because Jesus himself did not say it? That makes no sense in of itself.
second, you know how the Bible is "inspired of God"? well, when the old testament was written, as with the rest of the Bible, it was God's words that they wrote, and do you know who was the person mediating between God and men? It was Jesus.
The Bible refers to him as, "the word", he was usually the one who spoke on behalf of God, when Jehovah would speak to Moses or another servant, it would be Jesus that would usually be speaking in the literal sense, but it would be Jehovah's words.
So if Jesus help write the words in the old testament that condemned homosexuality, then would he support homosexuality? by no means, answer your own question.
second, you know how the Bible is "inspired of God"? well, when the old testament was written, as with the rest of the Bible, it was God's words that they wrote, and do you know who was the person mediating between God and men? It was Jesus.
The Bible refers to him as, "the word", he was usually the one who spoke on behalf of God, when Jehovah would speak to Moses or another servant, it would be Jesus that would usually be speaking in the literal sense, but it would be Jehovah's words.
So if Jesus help write the words in the old testament that condemned homosexuality, then would he support homosexuality? by no means, answer your own question.
- Status