Gay Marraiges .....
12 December 2012, 10:05 PM
#64
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Where It Rains A Lot.
Posts: 1,014
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would be surprised if SN had even one regular poster who was gay being as the overall attitude to them on this site is like going back to the school playground 50 years ago. A lot of growing up needed around here not to mention an injection of intelligence into some posters!
12 December 2012, 10:18 PM
#65
Scooby Regular
12 December 2012, 10:27 PM
#67
Lev. 18:22
•‘You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
•"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination."
Lev. 20:13
•"If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them."
•"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."
The above are difefrent takes on the same subject, in differing versions of the Bible.
God created Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. This signifies that God ordained order of male and female, not male and male or female and female. This is important because it was before the Mosaic Law was given.
•‘You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
•"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination."
Lev. 20:13
•"If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them."
•"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."
The above are difefrent takes on the same subject, in differing versions of the Bible.
God created Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. This signifies that God ordained order of male and female, not male and male or female and female. This is important because it was before the Mosaic Law was given.
Pete, gay people exist, quoting a rather lame 2000 odd year old bit of fiction wont change that, do you really buy that old Adam and Eve thing, all that evolution stuff is rubbishis it (I mean of the species, not the Mitsubishi as many will deny that kind of Evolution on a Subaru site).
Suspect you are just trolling as normal though an are looking for an angle for a wind up as you have never expressed that kind of literal devotion to the Christian faith before.
Primal Scream said it best, you just need to add "Bummers keep Bumming" to that list, not that I would call normally gay people that, just to illustrate a point !
Dealers keep dealin'
Thieves keep thievin'
****** keep whorin'
Junkies keep scorin'
Trade is on the meat rack
Strip joints full of hunchbacks
Bitches keep bitchin'
Clap keeps itchin'
Ain't no use in prayin'
That's the way it's stayin', baby
12 December 2012, 10:30 PM
#68
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Where It Rains A Lot.
Posts: 1,014
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I rest my case! 
13 December 2012, 12:40 AM
#70
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: here, there, everywhere
Posts: 3,111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
beleif can be very useful to many, maybe not you or i, but to others - i try not to rubbish there thoughts tbh.
if a church accepts gaymarrige, then crack on, if it doesnt -then move on or me non-married.
13 December 2012, 06:14 AM
#71
13 December 2012, 09:16 AM
#73
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The tension is between the harsh and conservative Mosaic Law of the Old Testament and the compassionate and inclusive spirit of the New. If one reads John 8:1-59
So, whilst Jesus forgave the women, He acknowledges adultery as a sin and commands her to sin no more. Whilst Jesus doesn't discuss homosexuality specifically in the New Testament, He does of course cite Genesis and the Law of Moses as authoritative and by extension did, does and will consider same sex marriage as sinful.
This presents a painful dilemma for liberal Christians who wish to extend a hand to people of all persuasions and moreso for homosexual Christian couples who wish to profess their love for one another in front of God. I imagine the latter would do well to consider a ceremony at a Unitarian church although I personally cannot reconcile how a service can endorse a 'sinful' bond; theologically it seems absurd.
I guess the only way to attack this is to imagine being gay and a Christian. That in the context of the Bible it is sinful is indisputable, but we're all sinners. So does one abstain? If one chooses that, the dilemma of gay marriage is removed. If one chooses not to abstain and wishes to formalise one's relationship, but acknowledges the absurdity of asking the church to endorse sin, one ought to marry in a civil ceremony. If one wishes to be married in a church one has to be able to reconcile the conflict between the source text of their faith and the actions they're asking to be sanctioned and whilst I'm unable to see how that's logically possible, I'm willing to listen to reasoning to the contrary.
1. Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2*Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. 3*The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4*they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5*Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” 6*This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7*And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8*And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. 9*But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. 10*Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” 11*She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”
This presents a painful dilemma for liberal Christians who wish to extend a hand to people of all persuasions and moreso for homosexual Christian couples who wish to profess their love for one another in front of God. I imagine the latter would do well to consider a ceremony at a Unitarian church although I personally cannot reconcile how a service can endorse a 'sinful' bond; theologically it seems absurd.
I guess the only way to attack this is to imagine being gay and a Christian. That in the context of the Bible it is sinful is indisputable, but we're all sinners. So does one abstain? If one chooses that, the dilemma of gay marriage is removed. If one chooses not to abstain and wishes to formalise one's relationship, but acknowledges the absurdity of asking the church to endorse sin, one ought to marry in a civil ceremony. If one wishes to be married in a church one has to be able to reconcile the conflict between the source text of their faith and the actions they're asking to be sanctioned and whilst I'm unable to see how that's logically possible, I'm willing to listen to reasoning to the contrary.
13 December 2012, 09:50 AM
#75
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alternative ending to John 8:1-59
1. Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2*Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. 3*The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4*they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5*Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” 6*This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7*And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.”Next thing a big rock smacked the woman on the side of the head and Jesus turned round and said "Mother, sometimes you really annoy me"
1. Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2*Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. 3*The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4*they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5*Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” 6*This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7*And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.”Next thing a big rock smacked the woman on the side of the head and Jesus turned round and said "Mother, sometimes you really annoy me"
13 December 2012, 10:09 AM
#79
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alternative ending to John 8:1-59
1. Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2*Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. 3*The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4*they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5*Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” 6*This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7*And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.”Next thing a big rock smacked the woman on the side of the head and Jesus turned round and said "Mother, sometimes you really annoy me"
1. Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2*Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. 3*The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4*they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5*Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” 6*This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7*And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.”Next thing a big rock smacked the woman on the side of the head and Jesus turned round and said "Mother, sometimes you really annoy me"
13 December 2012, 10:48 AM
#80
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: A World of my own
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gay marriages don't bother me, after all I DO work in show biz 
, pause for recognition ans applause, fine OK then 
, but I DO draw a line at gay abortions
, pause for recognition ans applause, fine OK then , but I DO draw a line at gay abortions
13 December 2012, 12:22 PM
#81
The tension is between the harsh and conservative Mosaic Law of the Old Testament and the compassionate and inclusive spirit of the New. If one reads John 8:1-59
So, whilst Jesus forgave the women, He acknowledges adultery as a sin and commands her to sin no more. Whilst Jesus doesn't discuss homosexuality specifically in the New Testament, He does of course cite Genesis and the Law of Moses as authoritative and by extension did, does and will consider same sex marriage as sinful.
This presents a painful dilemma for liberal Christians who wish to extend a hand to people of all persuasions and moreso for homosexual Christian couples who wish to profess their love for one another in front of God. I imagine the latter would do well to consider a ceremony at a Unitarian church although I personally cannot reconcile how a service can endorse a 'sinful' bond; theologically it seems absurd.
I guess the only way to attack this is to imagine being gay and a Christian. That in the context of the Bible it is sinful is indisputable, but we're all sinners. So does one abstain? If one chooses that, the dilemma of gay marriage is removed. If one chooses not to abstain and wishes to formalise one's relationship, but acknowledges the absurdity of asking the church to endorse sin, one ought to marry in a civil ceremony. If one wishes to be married in a church one has to be able to reconcile the conflict between the source text of their faith and the actions they're asking to be sanctioned and whilst I'm unable to see how that's logically possible, I'm willing to listen to reasoning to the contrary.
So, whilst Jesus forgave the women, He acknowledges adultery as a sin and commands her to sin no more. Whilst Jesus doesn't discuss homosexuality specifically in the New Testament, He does of course cite Genesis and the Law of Moses as authoritative and by extension did, does and will consider same sex marriage as sinful.
This presents a painful dilemma for liberal Christians who wish to extend a hand to people of all persuasions and moreso for homosexual Christian couples who wish to profess their love for one another in front of God. I imagine the latter would do well to consider a ceremony at a Unitarian church although I personally cannot reconcile how a service can endorse a 'sinful' bond; theologically it seems absurd.
I guess the only way to attack this is to imagine being gay and a Christian. That in the context of the Bible it is sinful is indisputable, but we're all sinners. So does one abstain? If one chooses that, the dilemma of gay marriage is removed. If one chooses not to abstain and wishes to formalise one's relationship, but acknowledges the absurdity of asking the church to endorse sin, one ought to marry in a civil ceremony. If one wishes to be married in a church one has to be able to reconcile the conflict between the source text of their faith and the actions they're asking to be sanctioned and whilst I'm unable to see how that's logically possible, I'm willing to listen to reasoning to the contrary.
13 December 2012, 02:01 PM
#84
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The inferences you make are not only offensive but there is no evidence to support them.
I can only assume you are getting desperate because you know you have no argument for your earlier views on the subject of marriage between homosexuals.
The only matter one can assume from your post is that you obviously believe in God and Jesus. No one can criticise you for that.
Les
13 December 2012, 02:25 PM
#85
Your second sentence really is completely ridiculous.
The inferences you make are not only offensive but there is no evidence to support them.
I can only assume you are getting desperate because you know you have no argument for your earlier views on the subject of marriage between homosexuals.
The only matter one can assume from your post is that you obviously believe in God and Jesus. No one can criticise you for that.
Les
The inferences you make are not only offensive but there is no evidence to support them.
I can only assume you are getting desperate because you know you have no argument for your earlier views on the subject of marriage between homosexuals.
The only matter one can assume from your post is that you obviously believe in God and Jesus. No one can criticise you for that.
Les
I agree with your sentiment though, the line of argument is rather desperate, to say the least.
13 December 2012, 07:00 PM
#90
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts