AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY
Richard Dawkins
prescribed what the punishment for them should be. The natures of the
divinely prescribed punishments imply how heinous the crimes are. Although a
particular crime is a different kind and have different characteristics to
other crimes, yet it may be equal or greater in heinousness. Thus God has
not prescribed that homosexuals should merely be spoken against, rejected,
discriminated against, or banished from the nations, but He requires that
they be put to death by every government under which they reside (Leviticus
20:13) and no sorrow should be had for them.
http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
Zadok
"Dickie Dawkins" <Resident of Hell.com> wrote in message
but He requires that
> they be put to death by every government under which they reside
(Leviticus
> 20:13) and no sorrow should be had for them.
Isn't that amazing.
He also says that if you break the sabbath, you should be put to death.
(Exodus 31: 14).
But that doesn't stop you religionists from breaking the Sabbath!!
So why should we take your leviticus law seriously??
Richard Dawkins
"Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote in message
news:bKccf.131812$Io.90806@clgrps13...
The old testament did teach that breaking the Sabbath
God was simply teaching us to be holy.
Christ broke down those barriers with his death.
But you already knew that :0)
Pastor Dave
<Daw...@Hell.com> spake thusly:
I don't feel sorry for them. They know what they're doing.
I do feel sad however, that they don't share in the joy of
eternal life.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
1st Century Church of Christ
http://home.tampabay.rr.com/1stcentury
What shall I render to the Lord
for all His benefits toward me?
I will take up the cup of salvation
and call upon the name of the Lord.
- Psalm 116:12-13
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
"Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
news:25ccf.68$4G6....@news.uswest.net...
You must have missed this day in Sunday school:
"Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we
have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip.
"For if the word spoken by angels was steadfast, and every transgression
and disobedience received a just recompense of reward; How shall we escape,
if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by
the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him..."
EVERY transgression of the law leads to death. It is by the grace of Jesus
Christ via His good news that we are saved, and that mercy comes to the
merciful.
Which, right now, leaves you out of the picture.
Ike
--
Don't put a period where God put a question mark.
******************************
"The Character Map: An Introduction to the Introductions in Revelation" is
now available in hardcover, softcover, and ebook editions.
For a synopsis, author bio, an explanation of the real "code" in Revelation,
an excerpt, and links to major sales sites, visit
******************************
Remove X from address to reply
David Chariot
Pure wickedness, Richard Dawkins, pure wickedness!
"Thou shalt not be a false witness of the Law, to use it against
thy brother: Only God knoweth the beginning and the ending
of all things, for his eye is single, and he is the holy Law."
http://tinyurl.com/74oty Book 2 "The Unknown Books of the Essenes"
--
<*> -------=======>>>>>>> <> <� <> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<|=== <*>
The Sign of the Son of Man Web Page
http://www.yhvh-dvyd.zoomshare.com/
For those who have not been able to access the Sign of the
Son of Man due to their browsers incompatibility, the Sign
has been revealed in the Photos Section of this Web Site.
Links - http://www.yhvh-dvyd.zoomshare.com/3.shtml
<*> -------=======>>>>>>> <> <� <> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<|=== <*>
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ The fear of the LORD is to hate evil: +
+ pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, +
+ and the froward mouth, do I hate. +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
<*> -------=======>>>>>>> <> <� <> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<|=== <*>
The first of all the commandments is,
Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart,
and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind,
and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.
,)))))))),,,
,(((((((((((((((,
)\`\)))))))))))))),
///`_ ```(((((((((
\\\ b\ \ ``)))))))
))\ | ((((((((
( \ |`. ))))))))
\, / ) ((((((((
`" / )))))))
/ ((((
| `))
And the second is like, namely this,
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
There is none other commandment greater than these.
Peace be with you through our Lord Jesus Christ
-------=======>>>>>>> <� <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<|===
And to Almighty God the Glory for ever and ever
markwise
Christ is the fulfillment of the sabbath. He is our sabbath-rest now.
Christians need not follow any sabbath day for Christ has fulfilled
that Law.
Matt. 11:28 "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will
give you rest."
Matt. 12:8 "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
Col. 2:16-17 Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or
with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a
**Sabbath day**. These are a shadow of the things that were to come;
the reality, however, is found in Christ.
Heb. 4:9-10 There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God;
for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own work, just as
God did from His.
This can also be confirmed by Christ himself in His own actions who
healed people on the sabbath.
bob young
Richard Dawkins wrote:
> Not only has God defined the true nature of crimes, but He has also
> prescribed what the punishment for them should be.
Well your god made you and you are a weirdo, so why shouldn't He make folks
that do not have their sexual orientations quite in place............no
sorry........
..................that's evolution............ forgot myself there for a
moment!
bob young
Zadok wrote:
Bet he doesn't give all his posessions to the poor either
bob young
Pastor Dave wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 18:15:47 -0700, "Richard Dawkins"
> <Daw...@Hell.com> spake thusly:
>
> >Not only has God defined the true nature of crimes, but He has also
> >prescribed what the punishment for them should be. The natures of the
> >divinely prescribed punishments imply how heinous the crimes are. Although a
> >particular crime is a different kind and have different characteristics to
> >other crimes, yet it may be equal or greater in heinousness. Thus God has
> >not prescribed that homosexuals should merely be spoken against, rejected,
> >discriminated against, or banished from the nations, but He requires that
> >they be put to death by every government under which they reside (Leviticus
> >20:13) and no sorrow should be had for them.
> >
> >http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
>
> I don't feel sorry for them. They know what they're doing.
> I do feel sad however, that they don't share in the joy of
> eternal life.
ROFL
Someone in heaven heard that his best friend down on earth had just passed away.
ÒOh I'm so looking forward to seeing him againÓ the man said. ÒSorryÓ said God,
ÒBut he will not be coming here because he has been a little bit more sinful
than you, so your friend, I have to tell you, will be going to the other place
called HellÓ.
So here's this man, sitting for eternity in paradise next to his loving God,
whilst his friend, who had been a little bit more sinful than he, is about to
roast for eternity on burning coals in a place called Hell.
Is it conceivable that anything could be more banal, juvenile, or crassly
stupid?
Bob
Humanist Brit.
Hong Kong
bob young
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." wrote:
I was amused at the mention of 'Angels' . When I was a kid [about 68 years ago]
angels were all the rage, in every church service and sunday school lecture.
Now they are hardly ever mentioned, no doubt because, like so much of
superstition and religion, some aspects of the beliefs, in the year 2005, are
just too ridiculous to accept. Like the resurrection, as another good example.
Have a good day now, You'all
bob young
markwise wrote:
the above para is folklore handed down by humans. Back then miracles were
hoped for since they had little else, no doctors, no Law enforcement, no
Laws, no safety, nothing, so all they had was the hope for a miracle.
There are no miracles today, or had you not noticed?
markwise
bob young wrote:
> > Christ is the fulfillment of the sabbath. He is our sabbath-rest now.
> > Christians need not follow any sabbath day for Christ has fulfilled
> > that Law.
> >
> > Matt. 11:28 "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will
> > give you rest."
> > Matt. 12:8 "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
> > Col. 2:16-17 Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or
> > with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a
> > **Sabbath day**. These are a shadow of the things that were to come;
> > the reality, however, is found in Christ.
> > Heb. 4:9-10 There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God;
> > for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own work, just as
> > God did from His.
> >
> > This can also be confirmed by Christ himself in His own actions who
> > healed people on the sabbath.
>
> the above para is folklore handed down by humans. Back then miracles were
> hoped for since they had little else, no doctors, no Law enforcement, no
> Laws, no safety, nothing, so all they had was the hope for a miracle.
<yawn>
> There are no miracles today, or had you not noticed?
I've seen things today that can only be explained as a miracle. A
friend of mine had terminal cancer, he was given 6 months to live.
Three months after being given that notice he was seeing his doctor for
a checkup and the cancer had disappeared. The doctor was dumbfounded
and said he had no medical explanation for what happened. This very
well could have been God's hands at work answering prayer.
• Ninure Saunders
-Richard Dawkins wrote:
->
-> Not only has God defined the true nature of crimes, but He has also
-> prescribed what the punishment for them should be. The natures of the
-> divinely prescribed punishments imply how heinous the crimes are.
-> Although a particular crime is a different kind and have different
-> characteristics to other crimes, yet it may be equal or greater in
-> heinousness. Thus God has not prescribed that homosexuals should
-> merely be spoken against, rejected, discriminated against, or
-> banished from the nations, but He requires that they be put to death
-> by every government under which they reside (Leviticus 20:13) and no
-> sorrow should be had for them.
Okay..than we shoul put people to death for every sin that that the
Bible "says" so, right?
Worshiping other gods
Deuteronomy 13:6-10 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or
thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine
own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods,
which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of
the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from
thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;
Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine
eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put
him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
Deuteronomy 17:2 -5 If there be found among you, within any of thy gates
which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought
wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his
covenant, And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either
the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not
commanded; And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired
diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such
abomination is wrought in Israel: Then shalt thou bring forth that man or
that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even
that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
Disobedience to Parents
Exo 21:17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be
put to death.
Deut 21:18-21 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not
obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when
they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father
and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his
city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders
of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our
voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall
stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among
you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
Murder
Exo 21:12 He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to
death.
Exo 21:15 And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely
put to death.
Adultery
Lev 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife,
even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the
adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
Lev 19:20 And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that is a
bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom
given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because
she was not free.
Kidnapping
Exo 21:16 And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found
in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
Beastiality
Lev 20:15 And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death:
and ye shall slay the beast.
Lev 20:16 And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto,
thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to
death; their blood shall be upon them.
Abominations
Lev 20:2 Again, thou shalt say to the children of Israel, Whosoever he be
of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel,
that giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death:
the people of the land shall stone him with stones.
Blasphemy
Lev 24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely
be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as
well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the
name of the LORD, shall be put to death.
Incest
Lev 20:11 And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered
his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their
blood shall be upon them.
Lev 20:12 And if a man lie with his daughter in law, both of them shall
surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood shall be
upon them.
Lev 20:14 And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they
shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness
among you.
Witchcraft
Ex. 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
Lev 20:27 A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a
wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones:
their blood shall be upon them.
Num 3:10 And thou shalt appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall wait
on their priest's office: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put
to death.
False Prophecy
Deu 13:5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to
death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God,
which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the
house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God
commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst
of thee.
Rebellion
Josh 1:18 Whosoever he be that doth rebel against thy commandment, and
will not hearken unto thy words in all that thou commandest him, he shall
be put to death: only be strong and of a good courage.
2 Chr 15:13 That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be
put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
Lying with a woman having her menstruation
Leviticus 20:18 And if a man shall lie with a woman having her
sickness, and shall uncover her nakedness; he hath discovered her
fountain, and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood: and both of
them shall be cut off from among their people.
Violations of the Sabbath
Exo 31:15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of
rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he
shall surely be put to death. This includes: Cooking food on sabbath (Exo
16:25), seek out food in any way on the Sabbath (Exo 16:26), leave home on
the Sabbath Exo(16:29), making a fire on the Sabbath (Exo 35:3).
The punishment for breaking these laws was stoning to death, as ordered by
GOD in Numbers 15:32-36 and Exodus 31:14 and Exodus 35:2.
Numbers 15:32-36 "And while the children of Israel were in the
wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.
And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron,
and unto all the congregation. And they put him in ward, because it was
not declared what should be done to him. And the LORD said unto Moses, The
man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him
with stones without the camp. And all the congregation brought him without
the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded
Moses."
Lost viriginity
Deuteronomy 22:21-24 "But if the thing is true, that the tokens of
virginity were not found in the young woman, then they shall bring out the
young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of the city
shall stone her to death with stones, because she has wrought folly in
Israel by playing the harlot in her father's house; so you shall purge
this evil from Israel."
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
--
Pax Christi,
• Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
Jesus is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
http://www.thebiblesite.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
Tom
"Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
Oh, so we can trash the Old Testament?
Tom
"markwise" <mark...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131541818.7...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Or Mr. Wise, it could have been the hand of any of the other thousands of
gods which humans worship. Or better yet Mr. Wise, it could have been a
natural occurrence. When you see your god actually do something that is
verifiable let us know. Until then your god is as silent as the rest.
jrs...@sbcglobal.net
"Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
<snip>
> Thus God has not prescribed that homosexuals should merely be spoken
> against, rejected, discriminated against, or banished from the nations,
> but He requires that they be put to death by every government under which
> they reside (Leviticus 20:13) and no sorrow should be had for them.
He would be an asshole for saying that...but He didn't write that.
Intollerant bigots like YOU wrote it.
JR
>
markwise
What's intolerant is not allowing someone their first amendment right
to a religious belief that homosexuality is a sin.
IKnowHimDoYou- A.
<Daw...@Hell.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________________________
Isn't it amazing that these poor lost souls who hate God always use His
Word for their arguments?
Why is that?
jrs...@sbcglobal.net
"IKnowHimDoYou- A." <IKno...@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
news:IKnowHim-091...@pm1-47.kalama.com...
> In article <RQccf.23$yZ2....@news.uswest.net>, "Richard Dawkins"
> <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote:
>
>> "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote in message
>> news:bKccf.131812$Io.90806@clgrps13...
>> >
>
> Isn't it amazing that these poor lost souls who hate God always use His
> Word for their arguments?
>
> Why is that?
You need to be enlightened to the fact that the Bible was written by men and
not God. If you take the Bible literally you are a fool.
JR
Thurisaz the Einherjer
> The natures of the
> divinely prescribed punishments imply how heinous the crimes are.
No. They imply that this gawd, if she could exist at all (fortunately she
can't), would be the supreme archetypical sadist of the universe. In other
words, all people with even a teenie-weenie bit of a sense for ethics would
be obliged to _fight_ this monster.
> http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
"Good Christian(TM)" hatemonger site. Göbbels and hitler would have been
proud of the one who wrote that shit.
--
Romans 2:24 revised:
"For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you
cretinists, as it is written on aig."
markwise
> > http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
>
> "Good Christian(TM)" hatemonger site. Göbbels and hitler would have been
> proud of the one who wrote that shit.
Goebbels and Hitler come from the same line of people who think its
okay to murder babies (i.e. abortion).
Last time I check, Christians condemn abortion.
• Ninure Saunders
"markwise" <mark...@gmail.com> wrote:
-Thurisaz the Einherjer wrote:
-> > http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
->
-> "Good Christian(TM)" hatemonger site. G=F6bbels and hitler would have been
-> proud of the one who wrote that shit.
-
-
-Goebbels and Hitler come from the same line of people who think its
-okay to murder babies (i.e. abortion).
-
-Last time I check, Christians condemn abortion.
Unless the women who seek abortions are Black that is.
Wasn't it a Republican "christian" that the suggested abirtung all Black
babues as the best way to reduce crime in the last month or so?
Peter Besenbruch
It's time to invoke one of the "traditions" of Usenet: Those who compare
the other side to Hitler have no argument. Here we have the case of both
sides doing it. Time to plonk the thread as a waste of bandwidth. ;)
Peter Besenbruch
> What's intolerant is not allowing someone their first amendment right
> to a religious belief that homosexuality is a sin.
What "Dawkins" appeared to be writing was an incitement to mass murder,
and that isn't covered by any laws regarding free speech. Also, laws
differ around the world. In Europe, one cannot advocate Naziism, or its
beliefs. I am no lawyer, so I don't know what reception "Dawkins'"
comments would have there. I suspect, however, he treads close to the line.
Peter Besenbruch
> I was amused at the mention of 'Angels' . When I was a kid [about 68
> years ago] angels were all the rage, in every church service and sunday
> school lecture.
> Now they are hardly ever mentioned, no doubt because, like so much of
> superstition and religion, some aspects of the beliefs, in the year
> 2005, are just too ridiculous to accept.Where were you in the 1990s,
> when angels were all the rage? In fact, I still see "angel" books in
> bookstores.
Where were you in the 1990s, when angels were all the rage. There are
still a number of books on angels in bookstores today.
Mark T
>> There are no miracles today, or had you not noticed?
> I've seen things today that can only be explained as a miracle.
Please provide a list of people who have been cured of the following
diseases by God:
- AIDS
- SARS
"In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus
concerning you." -- 1 Thessalonians 5:18
Thank you Jesus for ....
AIDS and HIV
Amebiasis
*Anthrax
*Botulism
*Brucellosis
Campylobacter enteritis
Chancroid
Chickenpox (Varicella)
Chlamydia trachomatis infections
Cholera
*Cryptosposidiosis
*Cyclosporiasis
Cytomegalovirus infection, congential
*Diphtheria
*Encephaltis, including
i. Primary, viral (including WNV)
ii. Post-infectious
iii. Vaccine-related
iv. Subacute sclerosing panencephalitis
v. Unspecified
*Food poisoning, all causes
*Gastroenteritis, institutional outbreaks & Norwalk virus
*Giardiasis, except asymptomatic cases
Gonorrhea
*Haemophilus influenzae b disease, invasive
*Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome
*Hemorrhagic fevers, including: *Ebola Virus, *Marburg Virus Disease, *Lassa
Fever, *other viral causes
Hepatitis, viral
i. *Hepatitis A
ii. Hepatitis B
iii. Hepatitis C
Hepatitis D (Delta hepatitis)
Herpes, neonatal
Influenza
*Legionellosis
Leprosy
*Listeriosis
Lyme Disease
Malaria
*Measles
*Meningitis, acute
i. *bacterial
ii. viral
iii. other
*Meningococcal disease, invasive
Mumps
Ophthalmia neonatorum
Paratyphoid Fever
Pertussis (Whooping Cough)
*Plague
*Poliomyelitis, acute
Psittacosis/Ornithosis
*Q Fever
*Rabies
*Respiratory infection outbreaks in institutions
Rubella
Rubella, congential syndrome
Salmonellosis
*Shigellosis
*Smallpox
Streptococcus pneumoniae, invasive
*Streptococcal infections, invasive Group A
*Streptococcal infections, Group Bneonatal
Syphilis
Tetanus
Trichinosis
Tuberculosis
*Tularemia
Typhoid Fever
*Verotoxin-producing E. coli infection indicator conditions including
Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS)
*Yellow Fever
Yersiniosis
Dore
> Christ is the fulfillment of the sabbath. He is our sabbath-rest now.
> Christians need not follow any sabbath day for Christ has fulfilled
> that Law.
Not true, just as thou shalt have NO other gods before me, Thou shalt make
no graven image, thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain, Honor thy
father and mother, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou
shalt not steal, thou shall not bear false witness and thou shalt not covet,
the seventh day Sabbath rest is STILL one of these commandments, and has NOT
been nullified by Christ, but indeed was observed by Him, just as His
followers are required to do so, as they are the rest of the commandments.
Matt 19:17
if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
KJV
John 14:15
15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
KJV
John 14:21
21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me:
and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and
will manifest myself to him.
KJV
John 15:10
10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have
kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
KJV
Rev 12:17
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the
remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the
testimony of Jesus Christ.
KJV
Rev 14:12
12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the
commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
KJV
Rev 22:14
4 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the
tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
KJV
cont
>
> Matt. 11:28 "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will
> give you rest."
Has nothing to do with the commandment to keep holy the seventh day that GOD
HALLOWED.
> Matt. 12:8 "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
Yes, meaning that it was NOT nullified, but still valid, to do good on the
Sabbath day.
> Col. 2:16-17 Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or
> with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a
> **Sabbath day**. These are a shadow of the things that were to come;
> the reality, however, is found in Christ.
Yes, meaning HOW you keep the Sabbath, NOT ignoring it all together.
> Heb. 4:9-10 There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God;
> for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own work, just as
> God did from His.
This is commanding that the Sabbath be observed, as man is to rest from his
labors on the seventh day, as GOD did His. However, the rest that Paul is
speaking about here is the millennial rest, that finally comes when the
government of God is established on the earth. For as 6000 years, the world
worked and fought against evil, the 7000 year, is the millennial rest and
reign, for a day is like a thousand years to God, thus the seventh
millennial rest. It does NOT remove the COMMAND to rest and keep holy the
seventh day Sabbath that GOD HALLOWED and wrote IN STONE by His own hand. NO
WHERE is the 4th commandment of the seventh day Sabbath nullified in
scripture.
>
> This can also be confirmed by Christ himself in His own actions who
> healed people on the sabbath.
Yes, doing good on the Sabbath is permitted, but IGNORING the commandment
completely is SIN.
--
Dore
"markwise" <mark...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131506867.7...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
• Ninure Saunders
<www...@tdoyoumean.2353> wrote:
-"markwise" wrote:
-
-
->> There are no miracles today, or had you not noticed?
-> I've seen things today that can only be explained as a miracle.
-
-
-Please provide a list of people who have been cured of the following
-diseases by God:
-
-- AIDS
I wish I knew how to find this former friend of mine The Rev. Steve
Pieters...but he was indeed cured of AIDS.the last time I saw him in 1995.
Richard Dawkins
"bob young" <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:43718EA8...@netvigator.com...
bob young
markwise wrote:
Very long Y A W N
You conveniently overlooked the millions that do die of cancer.
I suppose your friend was spared by your imaginary god and the other millions
allowed to die? Why?
In any case, you skirt the question, my point was 'any miracles like walking on
water or feeding multitudes with five loaves and fishes', not obscure claims
that none can verify. Of course you could always go to a Benny Hinn Show, he
has miracles on stage every week, but the trouble is they are cheap lies and
stunts, just like your miracle.
Try harder next time and give me a *verifiable* miracle.
Thanks
bob young
Richard Dawkins wrote:
I canot hate something that I know is simply a myth. What would be the
point.
i do not hate that miserable invisible god's followers either.
I just feel sorry for them
bob young
Peter Besenbruch wrote:
Just a few I suppose, for Fruitcakes ?
You missed my point, angels were mentioned in church, in schools REGULARLY
in my school days, but not today.
I repeat,
Because in 2005 angels are just TOO ridiculous for the average intelligent
person to swallow. a bit like 'walking on water'. That must have been the
dream of most folks living back in the time of the 'said' Jesus, so hence we
get the myth of walking on water. QED
There other good books in stores too, on humanism, and psychiatry etc.
bob young
Dore wrote:
> "markwise" <mark...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1131506867.7...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Christ is the fulfillment of the sabbath. He is our sabbath-rest now.
> > Christians need not follow any sabbath day for Christ has fulfilled
> > that Law.
>
> Not true, just as thou shalt have NO other gods before me, Thou shalt make
> no graven image, thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain,
This is not a god talking, it is the preachers and scribes making laws to
protect their imaginary god against those who follow a different imaginary god.
You really miust see things clearly, succinctly and without wearing blinkers
you know
> Honor thy
> father and mother, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou
> shalt not steal, thou shall not bear false witness and thou shalt not covet,
When the scribes wrote this [no god said it] there were no effective laws and
no police to enforce them, all they had was an imaginary powerful being which,
in those days was said to be 'just above the clouds'.
that is where we fly jets today!
bob young
jrs...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
what always amazes me is that scribes like Leviticus back in year one or
around year one actually heard words from a god, yet today's Popes do not !!
It really makes me wonder whether these old scribes were actually fanciful
fiction writers, or at worst, outright liars?
Or has god, simply decided that modern man with all his weapons of mass
destruction and his creating clones of animals, are just not worth talking to?
Mt safe bet would be, 'no gods exist'
>
>
> JR
> >
markwise
bob young wrote:
> > > There are no miracles today, or had you not noticed?
> >
> > I've seen things today that can only be explained as a miracle. A
> > friend of mine had terminal cancer, he was given 6 months to live.
> > Three months after being given that notice he was seeing his doctor for
> > a checkup and the cancer had disappeared. The doctor was dumbfounded
> > and said he had no medical explanation for what happened. This very
> > well could have been God's hands at work answering prayer.
>
> Very long Y A W N
>
> You conveniently overlooked the millions that do die of cancer.
No I didn't. You said there are no miracles today. I provided you
with an example that says otherwise.
> I suppose your friend was spared by your imaginary god and the other millions
> allowed to die? Why?
Do you claim to know the mind of God? Neither do I.
> In any case, you skirt the question, my point was 'any miracles like walking on
> water or feeding multitudes with five loaves and fishes', not obscure claims
> that none can verify. Of course you could always go to a Benny Hinn Show, he
> has miracles on stage every week, but the trouble is they are cheap lies and
> stunts, just like your miracle.
You said "There are no miracles today, or had you not noticed?" I
answered your question, or rather, refuted your point.
And speaking of verification, are you of the mind that supernatural
events can be verified? That science which observes the natural is
able to verify the supernatural?
> Try harder next time and give me a *verifiable* miracle.
I tend to see that as an oxymoron. Miracles happen, but when you find
a way to scientifically observe that and verify that you be sure to let
me know.
B J Blevins
> Not only has God defined the true nature of crimes, but He has also
> prescribed what the punishment for them should be. The natures of the
> divinely prescribed punishments imply how heinous the crimes are. Although a
> particular crime is a different kind and have different characteristics to
> other crimes, yet it may be equal or greater in heinousness. Thus God has
> not prescribed that homosexuals should merely be spoken against, rejected,
> discriminated against, or banished from the nations, but He requires that
> they be put to death by every government under which they reside (Leviticus
> 20:13) and no sorrow should be had for them.
>
> http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
Whoever works, or even kindles a fire, on the Sabbath "shall be put to
death." Gensis 35:2-3
bob young
markwise wrote:
Will do, I'm now off to see if I can find a god right here and now that can have a
lame fella 'get off his bed and walk' and who will then 'walk away Himself over
water'.
THEN and only THEN will I have seen a miracle.
Your example was pathetic and in line with the usual tripe that religionists come
out with when faced with the 'no miracles now why two thousand years back'? issue.
But you already knew that didn't you.
[no answer anticipated].
Cheers, here's a poem for you
Bob
Humanist Brit.
Hong Kong
Man of old, the savage,
formed the belief,
the eruption of the volcano
was god's expression of grief.
Man believed the lightning bolt,
for the crops - a blessing of rain,
the curse of flood lending starvation,
was spewed from heavenly gates.
Man believed he could calm divine wrath,
through sacrifice of a virgin pure,
though blood appeased him not,
how the quake continues to tremble the earth.
Man believed the sting of a bee,
the fangs of the serpent, the teeth of a bear
were all signs of divine things,
deities by the dozens, some invented in pairs.
Silly superstitions thrive to this day,
if not for the rationalist, skeptic,
and freethinker,
where would we be?
In Church thumping Bibles, that's where!
See, we've came a long way.
Instead of cracking virgins' skulls,
[with acknowledgements to: Sharon]
bob young
markwise wrote:
> Thurisaz the Einherjer wrote:
> > > http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
> >
> > "Good Christian(TM)" hatemonger site. Gφbbels and hitler would have been
> > proud of the one who wrote that shit.
>
> Goebbels and Hitler come from the same line of people who think its
> okay to murder babies (i.e. abortion).
>
> Last time I check, Christians condemn abortion.
'Revealed' 'Religion' is, likemindedness, power, superiority.
Wrong, Christians do not all condemn abortion as any honest survey will show
I would hate to be a fanatical religionists as it means lying through my
teeth constantly
bob
Humanist Brit.
markwise
bob young wrote:
> > I tend to see that as an oxymoron. Miracles happen, but when you find
> > a way to scientifically observe that and verify that you be sure to let
> > me know.
>
> Will do, I'm now off to see if I can find a god right here and now that can have a
> lame fella 'get off his bed and walk' and who will then 'walk away Himself over
> water'.
>
> THEN and only THEN will I have seen a miracle.
>
> Your example was pathetic and in line with the usual tripe that religionists come
> out with when faced with the 'no miracles now why two thousand years back'? issue.
> But you already knew that didn't you.
I'll go tell my friend that you think his survival of cancer was
pathetic. Yea, thanks a lot. Feel free to remove your foot from your
big mouth.
Mark T
> Feel free to remove your foot from your big mouth.
Quoting markunwise from elsewhere ...
> This is an argument based upon your own reasoning and not the words of
> Scripture.
> *Scripture* makes it clear
IT SURE DOES!!!!!
Jesus said in Matthew 5:42, "Give to him that asketh thee, and from
him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away."
May I have your house and car and borrow your most prized possession?
Don't rebel against these words of Jesus for rebellion is as the sin of
witchcraft!!!! - 1 Samuel 15:23 ...and Trew Kristyuns are told in the
bible not to suffer a witch to live - Exodus 22:18 !!! You would have to be
killed because Trew Kristyuns MUST follow the bible.
THIS IS AN ARGUMENT BASED ON THE WORDS OF SCRIPTURE!
Waiting eagerly for your reply ... and your house, car and most prized
possession. ;-)
Willy
<jrs...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:Ibqcf.17341$dO2....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "IKnowHimDoYou- A." <IKno...@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
> news:IKnowHim-091...@pm1-47.kalama.com...
>> In article <RQccf.23$yZ2....@news.uswest.net>, "Richard Dawkins"
>> <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote in message
>>> news:bKccf.131812$Io.90806@clgrps13...
>>> >
> _______________________________________________________________
>>
>> Isn't it amazing that these poor lost souls who hate God always use His
>> Word for their arguments?
>>
>> Why is that?
>
> You need to be enlightened to the fact that the Bible was written by men
> and not God. If you take the Bible literally you are a fool.
>
> JR
>
>
You are so right my borther. The Bible has to be viewed from a literary
point of view, not a literal one.
And besides that, the scripture was NOT referring to homosexuality as we
know it in todays society.
And of course, as usual, they throw out the rest of the surrounding verses,
but choose to keep this one.
Amazing the power of fundamentalism isn't it?
Willy
Willy
"Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
make it even more holy sounding.
None of us hate God, we simply know that the Holy Bible has to be viewed
from a literary standpoint, rather than trying to apply it literally.
Fundamentalists pick and choose what they wish to apply to their particular
belief system, and everyone else is going to hell if they don't believe.
Throw some genunine facts in your face, and you'll scream and yell, but
you'll never really respond. Becusse you're blinded by your system, and
can't even entertain an alternate thought. You've been brain washed into
believing that if you "dare" open your mind, you're surely sinning!!!
Richard Dawkins
"Willy" <wil...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:Gi9df.3361$p37....@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
>
> <jrs...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:Ibqcf.17341$dO2....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "IKnowHimDoYou- A." <IKno...@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
>> news:IKnowHim-091...@pm1-47.kalama.com...
>>> In article <RQccf.23$yZ2....@news.uswest.net>, "Richard Dawkins"
>>> <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote in message
>>>> news:bKccf.131812$Io.90806@clgrps13...
>>>> >
>> _______________________________________________________________
>>>
>>> Isn't it amazing that these poor lost souls who hate God always use His
>>> Word for their arguments?
>>>
>>> Why is that?
>>
>> You need to be enlightened to the fact that the Bible was written by men
>> and not God. If you take the Bible literally you are a fool.
>>
>> JR
>>
Proof?
> You are so right my borther. The Bible has to be viewed from a literary
> point of view, not a literal one.
Proof?
> And besides that, the scripture was NOT referring to homosexuality as we
> know it in todays society.
Or so your interpretation and not it's literal meaning would have you to
believe.
> And of course, as usual, they throw out the rest of the surrounding
> verses, but choose to keep this one.
>
> Amazing the power of fundamentalism isn't it?
>
> Willy
Amazing the power of apostasy isn't it?
jrs...@sbcglobal.net
"Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
>
> "Willy" <wil...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
> news:Gi9df.3361$p37....@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>> <jrs...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>> news:Ibqcf.17341$dO2....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>>>
>>> "IKnowHimDoYou- A." <IKno...@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
>>> news:IKnowHim-091...@pm1-47.kalama.com...
>>>> In article <RQccf.23$yZ2....@news.uswest.net>, "Richard Dawkins"
>>>> <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote in message
>>>>> news:bKccf.131812$Io.90806@clgrps13...
>>>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> Isn't it amazing that these poor lost souls who hate God always use His
>>>> Word for their arguments?
>>>>
>>>> Why is that?
>>>
>>> You need to be enlightened to the fact that the Bible was written by men
>>> and not God. If you take the Bible literally you are a fool.
>>>
>>> JR
>>>
>
> Proof?
It was written in the 3rd person. ie. "In the beginning God created the
heaven and the earth." not "In the beginning I, Lord God, created the
heaven and the earth."
<snip>
>
Richard Dawkins
<jrs...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:7madf.16781$tV6....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
Now, can you ditect us to the proof that the Bible has to be viewed from a
literary
point of view, not a literal one?
bob young
markwise wrote:
your friend was lucky. the doctors got it wrong. they are human, unlike your
invisible, never show god!
ROFL
bob young
Mark T wrote:
> "markunwise" wrote:
>
> > Feel free to remove your foot from your big mouth.
>
> Quoting markunwise from elsewhere ...
>
> > This is an argument based upon your own reasoning and not the words of
> > Scripture.
> > *Scripture* makes it clear
>
> IT SURE DOES!!!!!
>
> Jesus said in Matthew 5:42, "Give to him that asketh thee, and from
> him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away."
No Jesus DID NOT, what you read is what a human says a man called Jesus said,
years after he was supposed to have said it.
VERY MUCH A DIFFERENT THING.
If you want to play, tell me pray: how come the son of a god reaches age
around twenty yet nothing is recorded of His all important teenage years, His
babyhood etc.,?
I'll tell yer why, because the primitive fable writers of the time forgot about
this all important period and the simpletons of the time never questioned it.
Over to you............
>
>
> May I have your house and car and borrow your most prized possession?
>
> Don't rebel against these words of Jesus for rebellion is as the sin of
> witchcraft!!!! - 1 Samuel 15:23 ...and Trew Kristyuns are told in the
> bible not to suffer a witch to live - Exodus 22:18 !!! You would have to be
> killed because Trew Kristyuns MUST follow the bible.
See above
bob young
Willy wrote:
"Yup, true"
jrs...@sbcglobal.net
"Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
altruistic in presenting anything?
Additionally, the onus is on the one asserting that something is true or
exists...
JR
>
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
"Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
news:25ccf.68$4G6....@news.uswest.net...
> Not only has God defined the true nature of crimes, but He has also
> prescribed what the punishment for them should be. The natures of the
> divinely prescribed punishments imply how heinous the crimes are. Although
> a particular crime is a different kind and have different characteristics
> to other crimes, yet it may be equal or greater in heinousness. Thus God
> has not prescribed that homosexuals should merely be spoken against,
> rejected, discriminated against, or banished from the nations, but He
> requires that they be put to death by every government under which they
> reside (Leviticus 20:13) and no sorrow should be had for them.
>
> http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
>
>
Willy
"Barry OGrady" <athei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:t5gfn1l86s0ebrdlq...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 22:54:30 GMT, "Willy" <wil...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>><jrs...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>>news:Ibqcf.17341$dO2....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>>>
>>> "IKnowHimDoYou- A." <IKno...@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
>>> news:IKnowHim-091...@pm1-47.kalama.com...
>>>> In article <RQccf.23$yZ2....@news.uswest.net>, "Richard Dawkins"
>>>> <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote in message
>>>>> news:bKccf.131812$Io.90806@clgrps13...
>>>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> Isn't it amazing that these poor lost souls who hate God always use His
>>>> Word for their arguments?
>>>>
>>>> Why is that?
>>>
>>> You need to be enlightened to the fact that the Bible was written by men
>>> and not God. If you take the Bible literally you are a fool.
>>>
>>> JR
>>>
>>>
>>You are so right my borther. The Bible has to be viewed from a literary
>>point of view, not a literal one.
>>
>>And besides that, the scripture was NOT referring to homosexuality as we
>>know it in todays society.
>
>
>>And of course, as usual, they throw out the rest of the surrounding
>>verses,
>>but choose to keep this one.
>
>
>>Amazing the power of fundamentalism isn't it?
>
>
>>Willy
>
> Barry
> =====
> Home page
> http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
>
The Bible is most precious integral part of Christianity we have. I do not
discount anything contained therein as a life lesson - I merely realize that
the Bible must be read (which I've done many times over) from a literary
point of view rather than literal.
Willy
Dore
> This is not a god talking, it is the preachers and scribes making laws to
> protect their imaginary god against those who follow a different imaginary
> god.
>
> You really miust see things clearly, succinctly and without wearing
> blinkers
> you know
Why do you have an opinion on things that you clearly know nothing about?
--
Dore
"bob young" <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:4372E028...@netvigator.com...
bob young
Dore wrote:
> "bob young" <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote in message
> news:4372E028...@netvigator.com...
>
> > This is not a god talking, it is the preachers and scribes making laws to
> > protect their imaginary god against those who follow a different imaginary
> > god.
> >
> > You really miust see things clearly, succinctly and without wearing
> > blinkers
> > you know
>
> Why do you have an opinion on things that you clearly know nothing about?
> --
> Dore
Why do you have such a strong opinion on things that haver never been shown to
be anything other than ancient mythology?
bob
Humanist Brit.
Hong Kong
There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face
the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths. Almost inevitably
some part of him is aware that they are myths and that he believes them only
because they are comforting. But he dare not face this thought! Moreover, since
he is aware, however dimly, that his opinions are not rational, he becomes
furious when they are disputed.
[Bertrand Russell]
bob young
"Glenn (Christian Mystic)" wrote:
> These are Christian newsgroups, not that of Judaism.
All cults have one basic feature, they are each made up by contemporary or
early human beings
So they are, too all intents and purposes, the same
mindcontrol...@yahoo.com
You use the work "Cult" like it's a bad thing when anyone with just a
few intense glares and vague phrases can create a cult to improve their
lives.
Find out about it at http://www.MindControl101.com
JK.
Willy
"Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
minded, have spent countless hours in study and learning, and have to reckon
with the real facts - that the scripture, as beautiful as it can be, was
written, at the EARLIEST, 90-100 years after Christ's death, in most cases
hundreds of years, handed down, written within the tradition and
understanding of the society within which the writer lived, and certainly
guided by the customs and standards of that day and time.
If choosing to preach a few lines from a verse while ignoring the remainder
makes me an apostate, then so be it.
Otherwise, I consider myself living in the grace of God, as provided through
the univeral sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
Willy
"Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
many which you've sang I suspect, and these writer's would tell you they
were "inspired" in many cases. Is this inspiration different than the
feeling one had during writings of scripture? I think not, barring the
seemingly miraculous situations such as Moses on the Mount. Minister's
often feel inspired when they write or preach. Yet, they often contain
their interjected feelings and opinions... all while operating under the
guise of inspiration.
Do I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God? Absolutely. The issue
is that YOU believe it is from God's lips to our ears, if it is written in
red then that's exactly what Jesus must have said, and I on the other hand,
have been forced through historical revelation and science to the
realization that as beautiful as it is, and for all the truth it contains,
it is NOT meant to be taken literally (have you plucked your eye out today,
or cut off your hands to avoid sin?) rather, it is the life lesson we should
follow for a better quality of life here and now.
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
". Ninure Saunders" <Ninure...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote in message
news:Ninurenohate-0...@h-68-165-56-127.chcgilgm.dynamic.covad.net...
> In article <1131563791.8...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "markwise" <mark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> -Thurisaz the Einherjer wrote:
> -> > http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
> ->
> -> "Good Christian(TM)" hatemonger site. G=F6bbels and hitler would have
> been
> -> proud of the one who wrote that shit.
> -
> -
> -Goebbels and Hitler come from the same line of people who think its
> -okay to murder babies (i.e. abortion).
> -
> -Last time I check, Christians condemn abortion.
>
> Unless the women who seek abortions are Black that is.
>
> Wasn't it a Republican "christian" that the suggested abirtung all Black
> babues as the best way to reduce crime in the last month or so?
> --
> Pax Christi,
> . Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
>
> Jesus is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
> http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
>
> My Yahoo Group
> http://Ninure.tk
>
> Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
> http://www.MCCchurch.org
>
> The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
> http://www.thebiblesite.org
>
> To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
• Ninure Saunders
Mystic\)" <christi...@ev1.net> wrote:
-Not on my planet...
Yoi still are on [;anet earth, aren't you?
William Bennett on or about September 30, 2005, suggested aborting ALL
Black babies as a way to reduce. crime.
-
-". Ninure Saunders" <Ninure...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote in message
-news:Ninurenohate-0...@h-68-165-56-127.chcgilgm.dynamic.covad.net...
-> In article <1131563791.8...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
-> "markwise" <mark...@gmail.com> wrote:
->
-> -Thurisaz the Einherjer wrote:
-> -> > http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
-> ->
-> -> "Good Christian(TM)" hatemonger site. G=F6bbels and hitler would have
-> been
-> -> proud of the one who wrote that shit.
-> -
-> -
-> -Goebbels and Hitler come from the same line of people who think its
-> -okay to murder babies (i.e. abortion).
-> -
-> -Last time I check, Christians condemn abortion.
->
-> Unless the women who seek abortions are Black that is.
->
-> Wasn't it a Republican "christian" that the suggested aborting all Black
-> babies as the best way to reduce crime in the last month or so?
-> --
-> Pax Christi,
-> . Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
->
-> Jesus is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
-> http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
->
-> My Yahoo Group
-> http://Ninure.tk
->
-> Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
-> http://www.MCCchurch.org
->
-> The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
-> http://www.thebiblesite.org
->
-> To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
". Ninure Saunders" <Ninure...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote in message
> In article <11qqnob...@corp.supernews.com>, "Glenn \(Christian
> Mystic\)" <christi...@ev1.net> wrote:
>
> -Not on my planet...
>
> Yoi still are on [;anet earth, aren't you?
No, I am on planet Earth
> William Bennett on or about September 30, 2005, suggested aborting ALL
> Black babies as a way to reduce. crime.
Whoever that may be, he hardly represents all Republicans which *includes* a
large Black population.
Ninure, I am usually on your side, as you should know from past posts; but
the below was a bit *too much* and not a part of *reality*
Reality, William Bennett, may have said what you claimed, and may have
claimed to be a Republican, BUT unless his view matched over 50% of
Republicans, it is very dishonest to claim that anyone other than William
Bennett, said such...your statement claims that Republicans (note you didn't
place Republican in quotes) think this.
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
"Tom" <mmma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4Vncf.5500$Cw4....@fe03.lga...
>
> "Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
> news:RQccf.23$yZ2....@news.uswest.net...
>>
>> "Zadok" <nob...@accesswave.ca> wrote in message
>> news:bKccf.131812$Io.90806@clgrps13...
>>>
>>> "Dickie Dawkins" <Resident of Hell.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> but He requires that
>>>> they be put to death by every government under which they reside
>>> (Leviticus
>>>> 20:13) and no sorrow should be had for them.
>>>
>>> Isn't that amazing.
>>>
>>> He also says that if you break the sabbath, you should be put to death.
>>> (Exodus 31: 14).
>>>
>>> But that doesn't stop you religionists from breaking the Sabbath!!
>>>
>>> So why should we take your leviticus law seriously??
>>
>> The old testament did teach that breaking the Sabbath
>>
>> God was simply teaching us to be holy.
>> Christ broke down those barriers with his death.
>> But you already knew that :0)
>
> Oh, so we can trash the Old Testament?
>
• Ninure Saunders
Mystic\)" <christi...@ev1.net> wrote:
-". Ninure Saunders" <Ninure...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote in message
-news:Ninurenohate-2...@h-66-167-66-13.chcgilgm.dynamic.covad.net...
-> In article <11qqnob...@corp.supernews.com>, "Glenn \(Christian
-> Mystic\)" <christi...@ev1.net> wrote:
->
-> -Not on my planet...
->
-> Yoi still are on [;anet earth, aren't you?
-
-No, I am on planet Earth
A spelling flame..how sweet coming from another diabled person....NOT.
-
-> William Bennett on or about September 30, 2005, suggested aborting ALL
-> Black babies as a way to reduce. crime.
-
-Whoever that may be, he hardly represents all Republicans which *includes* a
-large Black population.
The Repiblucans does not include a "large Black population", there are
certainly very few elected Black GOP'ers.
-
-Ninure, I am usually on your side, as you should know from past posts; but
-the below was a bit *too much* and not a part of *reality*
Ur was very much part of reality....
-
-Reality, William Bennett, may have said what you claimed, and may have
-claimed to be a Republican, BUT unless his view matched over 50% of
-Republicans, it is very dishonest to claim that anyone other than William
-Bennett, said such...your statement claims that Republicans (note you didn't
-place Republican in quotes) think this.
What I said was:
"Wasn't it a Republican "christian" that the suggested aborting all Black
babies as the best way to reduce crime in the last month or so?"
And indeed, I was correct.
ormer Reagan administration Secretary of Education Bill Bennett: "[Y]ou
could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go
down." [Salem Radio Network's Bill Bennett's Morning in
America, 9/28/05] http://mediamatters.org/items/200509280006
To my knowledge, not a single GOP leader was willing to condemn syuch a
statement. and I certainly know of noi regular cinservative ng poster who
wasn't able to find some way to justify such a statemen
-
-> -
-> -". Ninure Saunders" <Ninure...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote in message
->
-news:Ninurenohate-0...@h-68-165-56-127.chcgilgm.dynamic.covad.net...
-> -> In article <1131563791.8...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
-> -> "markwise" <mark...@gmail.com> wrote:
-> ->
-> -> -Thurisaz the Einherjer wrote:
-> -> -> > http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
-> -> ->
-> -> -> "Good Christian(TM)" hatemonger site. G=F6bbels and hitler would
-> have
-> -> been
-> -> -> proud of the one who wrote that shit.
-> -> -
-> -> -
-> -> -Goebbels and Hitler come from the same line of people who think its
-> -> -okay to murder babies (i.e. abortion).
-> -> -
-> -> -Last time I check, Christians condemn abortion.
-> ->
-> -> Unless the women who seek abortions are Black that is.
-> ->
-> -> Wasn't it a Republican "christian" that the suggested aborting all
-> Black
-> -> babies as the best way to reduce crime in the last month or so?
-> -> --
-> -> Pax Christi,
-> -> . Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
-> ->
-> -> Jesus is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
-> -> http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
-> ->
-> -> My Yahoo Group
-> -> http://Ninure.tk
-> ->
-> -> Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
-> -> http://www.MCCchurch.org
-> ->
-> -> The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
-> -> http://www.thebiblesite.org
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
". Ninure Saunders" <Ninure...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote in message
> In article <11qr6kf...@corp.supernews.com>, "Glenn \(Christian
> Mystic\)" <christi...@ev1.net> wrote:
> -". Ninure Saunders" <Ninure...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote in message
> -news:Ninurenohate-2...@h-66-167-66-13.chcgilgm.dynamic.covad.net...
> -> In article <11qqnob...@corp.supernews.com>, "Glenn \(Christian
> -> Mystic\)" <christi...@ev1.net> wrote:
<snip>
> What I said was:
>
> "Wasn't it a Republican "christian" that the suggested aborting all Black
> babies as the best way to reduce crime in the last month or so?"
>
> And indeed, I was correct.
The correct statement would have been
"Wasn't it a "Republican" "christian" that the suggested aborting all Black
> babies as the best way to reduce crime in the last month or so?"
Because most Republicans would not agree with his statement. (note the added
quotation marks)
> ormer Reagan administration Secretary of Education Bill Bennett: "[Y]ou
> could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go
> down." [Salem Radio Network's Bill Bennett's Morning in
> America, 9/28/05] http://mediamatters.org/items/200509280006
>
> To my knowledge, not a single GOP leader was willing to condemn syuch a
> statement.
Maybe, like me, most of them had *never* heard / read that such a statement
was made. While I am an Independent, thus neither & both a Democrat and
Republican, my family members are almost all Republicans, and my family's
"race" is American, as in a melting-pot of (off the top of my head) Indian
(both American and of India), Black American, Filipino, Jewish, Irish,
German, English, Vietnamese, Cuban, and so on
> and I certainly know of noi regular cinservative ng poster who
> wasn't able to find some way to justify such a statemen
<snipped old stuff>
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > Thus God has not prescribed that homosexuals should merely be spoken
>> > against, rejected, discriminated against, or banished from the nations,
>> > which
>> > they reside (Leviticus 20:13) and no sorrow should be had for them.
>>
>> Intollerant bigots like YOU wrote it.
>
> What's intolerant is not allowing someone their first amendment right
> to a religious belief that homosexuality is a sin.
What's wrong with yelling "fire" in a movie house ? The above attempts to
incite a holocaust.
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
"Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
news:fT9df.72$Bm3...@news.uswest.net...
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
<jrs...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:7madf.16781$tV6....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
>> > Zadok wrote:
>> >> "Dickie Dawkins" <Resident of Hell.com> wrote in message
>> >>
>> >> which they reside (Leviticus
>> >> > 20:13) and no sorrow should be had for them.
>> >>
>> >> He also says that if you break the sabbath, you should be put to
>> >> death.
>> >> (Exodus 31: 14).
>> >> But that doesn't stop you religionists from breaking the Sabbath!!
>> >>
>> >> So why should we take your leviticus law seriously??
>> >
>> >
>> Why do you hate God so vehemently?
>
> point.
> i do not hate that miserable invisible god's followers either.
> I just feel sorry for them
>
And when a loved one of yours dies "Never to be seen again" we feel sorry
for *you*
While I am looking forward to seeing my loving wife *again*
Enjoy your *loss*
David Jensen
"Glenn \(Christian Mystic\)" <christi...@ev1.net> wrote in
<11uujr2...@corp.supernews.com>:
There are a couple of ways to look at this. Since no evidence exists
that any gods or afterlife exist, the claim that you believe in an
afterlife could be considered a serious case of denial or wishful
thinking. The other possibility is that such will happen, but that you
have no idea if you will ever meet up with your loved ones again -- the
teachings in the New Testament are confusing, at best. What we also see
from this is an excuse by some to be poor stewards of the earth we have,
since the doctrine allows them to claim that our earth isn't important,
that only the afterlife matters. This leads to very bad ideas, ideas
that are contrary to Jesus's teachings, but tolerated nonetheless --
from a willingness to tolerate mindless slaughter in the battlefields to
a willingness to let the poor, the ill and the elderly suffer to a
willingness to destroy the environment for private gain.
>Enjoy your *loss*
>
What a very smug and un-Christian comment.
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
"David Jensen" <da...@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:0j2vu1h321h6goncr...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 09:18:16 -0600, in alt.talk.creationism
> "Glenn \(Christian Mystic\)" <christi...@ev1.net> wrote in
> <11uujr2...@corp.supernews.com>:
>>"bob young" <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote in message
>>news:4372DB3C...@netvigator.com...
>>> Richard Dawkins wrote:
>>>> "bob young" <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:43718EA8...@netvigator.com...
>>>> > Zadok wrote:
>>>> >> "Dickie Dawkins" <Resident of Hell.com> wrote in message
<snip>
>>>> > Bet he doesn't give all his posessions to the poor either
>>>> >
>>>> Why do you hate God so vehemently?
>>>
>>> I canot hate something that I know is simply a myth. What would be the
>>> point.
>>> i do not hate that miserable invisible god's followers either.
>>> I just feel sorry for them
>>>
>>And when a loved one of yours dies "Never to be seen again" we feel sorry
>>for *you*
>>While I am looking forward to seeing my loving wife *again*
>
> There are a couple of ways to look at this. Since no evidence exists
> that any gods or afterlife exist,
No material evidence outside of personal experiences (which cannot be proven
to anyone except the one(s) having had the experiences) many of us have seen
such evidences, most of us are know as 'theists'
> ...the claim that you believe in an
> afterlife could be considered a serious case of denial or wishful
> thinking. The other possibility is that such will happen, but that you
> have no idea if you will ever meet up with your loved ones again --
I have, in dreams and visions, as well as have been allowed to smell the
rose-petal gown she is wearing, when she is near-by.
Don't tell me what *I* do or do not know, I *know* I will meet up with her
again.
> the teachings in the New Testament are confusing, at best.
Such is why we must depend on God's Holy Spirit more than on some book.
>What we also see from this is an excuse by some to be poor stewards of the
>earth we have,
> since the doctrine allows them to claim that our earth isn't important,
> that only the afterlife matters.
Maybe in your world, I see that we are judged in part, on how we care for
God's gifts to us.
> This leads to very bad ideas, ideas that are contrary to Jesus's
> teachings,
Yes what you have claimed to be "the doctrine" certianly does run contrary
to the doctrine of Jesus.
> but tolerated nonetheless --
> from a willingness to tolerate mindless slaughter in the battlefields to
> a willingness to let the poor, the ill and the elderly suffer to a
> willingness to destroy the environment for private gain.
>
>>Enjoy your *loss*
>>
> What a very smug and un-Christian comment.
Actually, you need to read what I was responding to. BTW, by your "the
doctrine" statement, I have to wonder if you even know what is / isn't
"Christian"
David Jensen
So since you have no physical evidence, you claim that something,
possibly imagined and completely untestable, counts as evidence here.
Yet others also make claims based on the same standard you use that
completely contradict yours. Are both of you right?
>> ...the claim that you believe in an
>> afterlife could be considered a serious case of denial or wishful
>> thinking. The other possibility is that such will happen, but that you
>> have no idea if you will ever meet up with your loved ones again --
>
>I have, in dreams and visions, as well as have been allowed to smell the
>rose-petal gown she is wearing, when she is near-by.
>
>Don't tell me what *I* do or do not know, I *know* I will meet up with her
>again.
Yes, you believe that.
>> the teachings in the New Testament are confusing, at best.
>
>Such is why we must depend on God's Holy Spirit more than on some book.
How do you explain that others from other religious traditions have
similar events in their life that contradict what you teach?
>>What we also see from this is an excuse by some to be poor stewards of the
>>earth we have,
>> since the doctrine allows them to claim that our earth isn't important,
>> that only the afterlife matters.
I do believe that I intended to write "their doctrine" rather than "the
doctrine".
>Maybe in your world, I see that we are judged in part, on how we care for
>God's gifts to us.
I live on the same earth you do. I see people like Reagan's Secretary of
Interior or the entire Bush Administration show no concern at all for
what we have.
>> This leads to very bad ideas, ideas that are contrary to Jesus's
>> teachings,
>
>Yes what you have claimed to be "the doctrine" certianly does run contrary
>to the doctrine of Jesus.
That's because people claim all sorts of things in the name of
Christianity, and the Millennialists seem to be least concerned with
what happens to humans here on earth.
>> but tolerated nonetheless --
>> from a willingness to tolerate mindless slaughter in the battlefields to
>> a willingness to let the poor, the ill and the elderly suffer to a
>> willingness to destroy the environment for private gain.
>>
>>>Enjoy your *loss*
>>>
>> What a very smug and un-Christian comment.
>
>Actually, you need to read what I was responding to. BTW, by your "the
>doctrine" statement, I have to wonder if you even know what is / isn't
>"Christian"
I know that there are many people who consider themselves to be
Christian who teach doctrines that are contrary to the teachings of
Jesus. I was not referring to all Christians, merely those who think it
is okay to ignore the present and stewardship of the earth.
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 16:24:35 -0600, in alt.talk.creationism
> "Glenn \(Christian Mystic\)" <christi...@ev1.net> wrote in
> <11v79uc...@corp.supernews.com>:
>>"David Jensen" <da...@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
>>news:0j2vu1h321h6goncr...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 09:18:16 -0600, in alt.talk.creationism
>>> "Glenn \(Christian Mystic\)" <christi...@ev1.net> wrote in
>>> <11uujr2...@corp.supernews.com>:
>>>>"bob young" <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:4372DB3C...@netvigator.com...
>>>>> Richard Dawkins wrote:
>>>>>> "bob young" <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:43718EA8...@netvigator.com...
>>>>>> > Zadok wrote:
>>>>>> >> "Dickie Dawkins" <Resident of Hell.com> wrote in message
>>
>><snip>
>>> There are a couple of ways to look at this. Since no evidence exists
>>> that any gods or afterlife exist,
>>
>>No material evidence outside of personal experiences (which cannot be
>>proven
>>to anyone except the one(s) having had the experiences) many of us have
>>seen
>>such evidences, most of us are know as 'theists'
>
> So since you have no physical evidence, you claim that something,
> possibly imagined and completely untestable, counts as evidence here.
It does when it happened to you, and others around you, even through you may
not be able to present it as such to people like yourself who were not
involved in the experience.
> Yet others also make claims based on the same standard you use that
> completely contradict yours. Are both of you right?
Yes, unlike the physical world, the Spiritual realms do not have to abide by
the 'rules' of carnal logic. Often in Spiritual matters without both halfs
of the truth (both contradictions accepted as halves of the whole truth) you
have a half-truth(a lie)
Even in logic we have 'complex truths' which at first glance appear to be
contradictions, but are relative truths which can be shown not to be
contradictory after all
>>> ...the claim that you believe in an
>>> afterlife could be considered a serious case of denial or wishful
>>> thinking. The other possibility is that such will happen, but that you
>>> have no idea if you will ever meet up with your loved ones again --
>>
>>I have, in dreams and visions, as well as have been allowed to smell the
>>rose-petal gown she is wearing, when she is near-by.
>>Don't tell me what *I* do or do not know, I *know* I will meet up with her
>>again.
>
> Yes, you believe that.
I have already.
>>> the teachings in the New Testament are confusing, at best.
>>
>>Such is why we must depend on God's Holy Spirit more than on some book.
>
> How do you explain that others from other religious traditions have
> similar events in their life that contradict what you teach?
Religion deals with Spiritual matters, in which contradictions exist as part
of reality.
>>>What we also see from this is an excuse by some to be poor stewards of
>>>the
>>>earth we have, since the doctrine allows them to claim that our earth
>>>isn't important,
>>> that only the afterlife matters.
>
> I do believe that I intended to write "their doctrine" rather than "the
> doctrine".
>
>>Maybe in your world, I see that we are judged in part, on how we care for
>>God's gifts to us.
>
> I live on the same earth you do. I see people like Reagan's Secretary of
> Interior or the entire Bush Administration show no concern at all for
> what we have.
So ? What does that have to do with the teachings of Christ ?
The word *Christian* means *Christ-like* someone trying to live by Christ's
teaching, or example.
Christ is the *source*, meaning Christianity is based on *Christ* and not on
people merely claiming to be Christians, even if they are the majority of
those claiming to be such, OR even if *no one* lives up to the title !
>>> This leads to very bad ideas, ideas that are contrary to Jesus's
>>> teachings,
>>
>>Yes what you have claimed to be "the doctrine" certianly does run contrary
>>to the doctrine of Jesus.
>
> That's because people claim all sorts of things in the name of
> Christianity, and the Millennialists seem to be least concerned with
> what happens to humans here on earth.
That's because you are not using the word *Christianity* as to what the word
means.
>>> but tolerated nonetheless --
>>> from a willingness to tolerate mindless slaughter in the battlefields to
>>> a willingness to let the poor, the ill and the elderly suffer to a
>>> willingness to destroy the environment for private gain.
>>>
>>>>Enjoy your *loss*
>>>>
>>> What a very smug and un-Christian comment.
>>
>>Actually, you need to read what I was responding to. BTW, by your "the
>>doctrine" statement, I have to wonder if you even know what is / isn't
>>"Christian"
>
> I know that there are many people who consider themselves to be
> Christian who teach doctrines that are contrary to the teachings of
> Jesus. I was not referring to all Christians, merely those who think it
> is okay to ignore the present and stewardship of the earth.
Thanks for clearifying what you mean, as you should have done from the start
BTW we are to rejoice in the Lord always, there is nothing unChristian about
being "smug" that you are blessed, and we *are* blessed that we are free of
the heartach an athiest faces when one of their loved ones die, as we can
have comfort that one; "they are in a far better place" and two; "we shall
someday be together again", of which, given the same evidences we are, they
choose not to accept the evidence, for what it is.
Example, I am still basically an agnostic (prove it to me) by nature, but
back in 1968 I noticed that there was an overabundance of "coincidences" in
my life which obviously were not under any humanly possible controls,
involving things like earthquakes, the weather, and etc. which worked for my
benifit it became undeniably *obvious* to me that these were not really mere
coincidences, but it was clear to me that *someone* or something much
greater than myself !!!Had a *plan* for my life, and was carrying it out!!!
So I asked "It" to introduce His-/Her-/It-self to me, as I had accepted
where "It" was taking me, on January 13, 1969 He lead me to Him.
Others, will continually ignor, or simply be blind to, as they "don't want
to go there" for some reason or another.
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
"Tom" <mmma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4Vncf.5501$Cw4....@fe03.lga...
>
> "markwise" <mark...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1131541818.7...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> bob young wrote:
>>
>>> > Christ is the fulfillment of the sabbath. He is our sabbath-rest now.
>>> > Christians need not follow any sabbath day for Christ has fulfilled
>>> > that Law.
>>> >
>>> > Matt. 11:28 "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I
>>> > will
>>> > give you rest."
>>> > Matt. 12:8 "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
>>> > Col. 2:16-17 Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or
>>> > with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a
>>> > **Sabbath day**. These are a shadow of the things that were to come;
>>> > the reality, however, is found in Christ.
>>> > Heb. 4:9-10 There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God;
>>> > for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own work, just as
>>> > God did from His.
>>> >
>>> > This can also be confirmed by Christ himself in His own actions who
>>> > healed people on the sabbath.
>>>
>>> the above para is folklore handed down by humans. Back then miracles
>>> were
>>> hoped for since they had little else, no doctors, no Law enforcement, no
>>> Laws, no safety, nothing, so all they had was the hope for a miracle.
>>
>> <yawn>
>>
>>
>>> There are no miracles today, or had you not noticed?
>>
>> I've seen things today that can only be explained as a miracle. A
>> friend of mine had terminal cancer, he was given 6 months to live.
>> Three months after being given that notice he was seeing his doctor for
>> a checkup and the cancer had disappeared. The doctor was dumbfounded
>> and said he had no medical explanation for what happened. This very
>> well could have been God's hands at work answering prayer.
>
> Or Mr. Wise, it could have been the hand of any of the other thousands of
> gods which humans worship. Or better yet Mr. Wise, it could have been a
> natural occurrence. When you see your god actually do something that is
> verifiable let us know. Until then your god is as silent as the rest.
>
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
"Pastor Dave" <1news-gr...@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:nrm2n1psslpksbm91...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 18:15:47 -0700, "Richard Dawkins"
> <Daw...@Hell.com> spake thusly:
>
>>Not only has God defined the true nature of crimes, but He has also
>>prescribed what the punishment for them should be. The natures of the
>>divinely prescribed punishments imply how heinous the crimes are. Although
>>a
>>particular crime is a different kind and have different characteristics to
>>other crimes, yet it may be equal or greater in heinousness. Thus God has
>>not prescribed that homosexuals should merely be spoken against, rejected,
>>discriminated against, or banished from the nations, but He requires that
>>they be put to death by every government under which they reside
>>(Leviticus
>>20:13) and no sorrow should be had for them.
>>
>>http://www.tencommandments.org/homosexual.html
>
> I don't feel sorry for them. They know what they're doing.
> I do feel sad however, that they don't share in the joy of
> eternal life.
>
> --
>
> Pastor Dave Raymond
> 1st Century Church of Christ
>
> http://home.tampabay.rr.com/1stcentury
>
> What shall I render to the Lord
> for all His benefits toward me?
> I will take up the cup of salvation
> and call upon the name of the Lord.
> - Psalm 116:12-13
>
• Ninure Saunders
Bible References
In Biblical times, same-gender sexual interactions could take many forms.
Some were:
1. kings of conquered tribes were sometimes raped by the invading army as
the ultimate symbol of defeat and humiliation. Homosexual rape was also a
way of humiliating visitors.
2. some non-Jewish tribes in the area had male prostitutes in their
temples who engaged in same-sex activities; this horrified the ancient
Israelites. Temple prostitution is no longer found in most areas of the
world.
3. it was common for male adults to keep boy prostitutes for the purpose
of sexual activity. In modern times, this is considered child abuse, a
criminal offense.
4. it is reasonable to assume that many loving gay and lesbian
relationships existed, but these would normally have been conducted in
secret.
Only the last type would have any similarity to today's gay and lesbian
consentual, committed, loving relationships. And they are not mentioned at
all in the Bible.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beliefs Regarding the Bible
Christians differ in their view of the Bible:
* Generally speaking, Fundamentalists and other Evangelical Christians
believe that:
o the Bible, as originally written, is inerrent (infallible) and that God
prevented the authors from error)
o every verse is useful in their understanding of God's intentions
o one should initially attempt to interpret each passage according to its
literal meaning
Many conservative Christians believe that certain translations are
essentially free of error; e.g. the King James Version and the New
International Version. Thus, when they read some of the passages that
clearly and unmistakably condemn homosexuality, they are inclined to trust
the translators and conclude that God hates homosexuality.Unfortunately,
many sets of translators have been heavily biasedagainst certain groups of
people: Witches, gays and lesbians included.
* More liberal Christians tend to look upon the Bible as containing many
transitional errors, whose verses should not necessarily all be taken at
their face value. Sections accepting slavery as a civil institution is one
example. Other examples are seen in many of the verses that deal with
homosexuality.
When one compares the original Hebrew and Greek writings with various
translations of the Bible, discrepancies emerge. Those activities which
the writers of the Bible condemn are either ambiguous or are unrelated to
consentual homosexuality within a committed relationship. They mostly
relate to rape, or temple prostitution.
Many versions of the Bible exist in the English language. Each reflects
the world view, beliefs and mind sets of its translators. Their personal
biases distort their work. There is an additional complexity facing
translators: today's society is very different from that of Biblical
times. It is sometimes difficult to find a current English word that
matches a Hebrew or Greek term.
Many words have been translated from the original Hebrew and Greek texts
as "homosexual", "sodomite", "homosexuality". However, most (perhaps all)
of the references bear no similarity to today's lesbian and gay
partnerships. By carefully reading the original texts and considering the
societies in which they were written, one comes to surprising conclusions:
* The Bible has a lot to say about temple prostitution.
* God condemned the town of Sodom, but apparently not because its
inhabitants were engaging in homosexual relationships. God seems to have
destroyed Sodom because of its treatment of strangers and lack of charity
towards the poor.
* The Bible says almost nothing about homosexual feelings;
* It says nothing about sexual orientation. The writers of the Bible
assumed that everyone was heterosexual (or "straight"). This is
reasonable, because the concept of sexual orientation was not developed
until the late 19th century.
* Although Jesus gave us hundreds of instructions on what behaviors to
avoid and which to embrace, he said nothing about homosexuality.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specific Verses from the Hebrew Scriptures
* Genesis 19 describes how two angels visited Sodom and were welcomed into
Lot's house. The angels were sent to warn Lot that God was displeased with
wickedness of the city's residents and had decided to destroy the city.
The men of the city gathered around the house and demanded that Lot send
the visitors to the mob so that they might know the angels. [The Hebrew
verb yada (to know) is ambiguous. It appears 943 times in the Hebrew
Scriptures (Old Testament). In only about a dozen of these cases does it
refers to sexual activity; it is not clear whether the mob wanted to rape
the angels or to meet with them, and perhaps attack them physically. From
the context, it is obvious that their mood was not friendly]. Lot refused,
but offered his two virgin daughters to be heterosexually raped if that
would appease the mob. The offer was declined. The angels urged Lot and
his family to flee and to not look back. Unfortunately, Lot's wife looked
the wrong way, so God killed her because of her curiosity.
God was apparently not critical of Lot for offering his two daughters to
be raped. However, God was angry at the other inhabitants of the town. He
destroyed Sodom with fire and brimstone (sulfur). He presumably killed all
of the men in the mob, their wives and other adults, as well as children,
infants, newborns, etc. It is unclear from these few verses whether God
demolished the city because the citizens habitually:
1. were uncharitable and abusive to strangers
2. wanted to rape people
3. engaged in homosexual acts
One has to look elsewhere in the Bible for references to Sodom in order to
determine which interpretation is correct.
The Church has traditionally accepted the third explanation. In fact, the
term sodomy which means anal intercourse was derived from the name of the
city, Sodom. But the first explanation is clearly the valid one. This is
obvious if we refer to:
o Matthew 10:14-15 and Luke 10:7-16: Jesus implied that the sin of the
people of Sodom was to be inhospitable to strangers.
o Ezekeiel 16:48-50: God states clearly that he destroyed Sodom's sins
because of their pride, their excess of food while the poor and needy
suffered, and their worship of many idols; sexual
activity is not even mentioned.
o Jude, Verse 7: Jude disagreed with Jesus and Exekeiel; he wrote that
Sodom's sins were sexual in nature. Various biblical translations describe
the sin as fornication, going after strange flesh, sexual immorality,
perverted sensuality, homosexuality, lust of every kind, immoral acts and
unnatural lust; you can take your pick.
We are faced with the inescapable and rather ironic conclusion that the
condemned activities in Sodom had nothing to do with sodomy.
* Leviticus 18:22 states: "Thou shall not lie with mankind as with
womankind: it is abomination." The term abomination (to'ebah) is a
religious term, usually reserved for use against idolatry. If the
writer(s) of Leviticus was referring to a moral violation, he would have
used the Hebrew word "zimah". The verse seems to refer to temple
prostitution, which was a common practice in the rest of the Middle East
at that time. Qadesh referred to male religious prostitutes. (See the
discussion of Deuteronomy below).
* Leviticus 20:13 similarly states: "If a man also lie with mankind as he
lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they
should surely be put to death....". This is similar to Leviticus 18:22; it
refers to temple homosexual prostitution.
Verse 20:13 is a part of the Holiness Code which is described in Leviticus
17:1 to 26:46. The code lists 614 ethical and ritual laws which were to be
followed by the ancient Israelites. They appear to be a grouping of
several older collections of laws. A consensus exists amongst Christian
theologians, pastors and teleministers that 612 out of the 614 components
of the Holiness Code are no longer applicable to today's Christians. These
permit:
o slavery (25:44)
They require:
o a child to be killed if he/she curses their parent (20:9)
o all persons guilty of adultery to be killed (20:10)
o the daughter of a priest who engages in prostitution to be killed (21:9)
o a priest to marry a virgin (21:13)
o ritual killing of animals, using cattle, sheep and goats (22:19)
o observation of 7 feasts: Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread,
Feast of Firstfruits, Feast of Pentecost, Feast of Trumpets, Day of
Atonement, Feast of Tabernacles (23)
o a person who takes the Lord's name in vain is to be killed (24:16)
They prohibit:
o heterosexual intercourse when a woman has her period (18:19)
o harvesting the corners of a field (19:9)
o eating fruit from a young tree (19:23)
o wearing clothes that are made from a textile blend (19:19)
o cross-breeding livestock (19:19)
o sowing a field with mixed seed (19:19)
o shaving or getting a hair cut (19:27)
o tattoos (19:28)
o even a mildly disabled person from becoming a priest (21:18)
o charging of interest on a loan (25:37)
A minority of Christian churches (e.g. Seventh Day Adventists) teach that
worship is to occur on Saturday (19:30) However, essentially all
conservative Christian leaders teach that only one Holiness Law dealing
with homosexuality is still valid today. Christians are free to wear
tattoos, eat shrimp pork or rare meat, wear polyester-cotton blends, seed
their lawns with a grass mixture, and get their hair cut. But
homosexuality is somehow taboo. We have been unable to find any logical
explanation that would justify retaining this one law against
homosexuality while abandoning all of the rest. We find their stance to be
less than ethical.
* Deuteronomy 23:17 states (in the King James Version) "There shall be no
whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel .
This is a translation error by the authors of the KJV. The word qadesh in
the original text was mistranslated as sodomite. Quadesh means "holy one"
and is here used to refer to a man who engages in ritual prostitution in
the temple. Other Bible translations use accurate terms such as shrine
prostitute, temple prostitute, prostitute and cult prostitute. The entire
verse seems to condemn prostitution, both heterosexual and homosexual.
* Judges 19 describes an event much like that at Sodom. This time, an
unnamed Levite visited the town of Gibeah with his slaves and concubine.
He met an old farmer and was made welcome. A gang of men appeared and
demanded that the old man send out the Levite that they might homosexually
rape or assault him. (It is again not clear what the precise meaning of
the verb to know was). The old man argued that they should not abuse the
visitor. He offered to give them both the Levite's concubine and his own
virgin daughter to be heterosexually raped. The mob accepted the former,
raped her all night and finally killed her. The Levite sliced up her body
into 12 pieces and sent one to each of the tribes of Israel. This
triggered a war between the inhabitants of Gibeah and the Israelites
during which tens of thousands died. There was no condemnation against the
Levite for sacrificing his concubine, or for committing an indignity to a
body. Judges 20:5 emphasizes that the aim of the mob was to kill the
stranger - the ultimate act of inhospitality. It appears that these
passages condemn abusive treatment of visitors. If they actually refer to
homosexual activity, then they condemn homosexual rape; they have nothing
at all to say about consentual homosexual relationships.
* I Kings 14:24 and 15:12 again refer to temple prostitution. The original
word qadesh is mistranslated as sodomite (homosexual) in the King James
Version, but as male prostitute, male cult prostitutes, and male shrine
prostitutes in more accurate versions. As mentioned before, there is
little evidence that homosexuality was involved. Again, the text has
nothing to say about consentual homosexual relationships.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specific Verses from the Christian Scriptures
* In Romans 1:26 and 27, Paul criticizes sexual activity which is against
a person's nature or disposition. This passage has been interpreted in
many ways:
o most Biblical scholars believe that these verses condemn all gay and
lesbian activity, whether casual or in committed relationships.
o some people believe that St. Paul is criticizing group orgiastic
homosexual activities, but has nothing to say about monogamous homosexual
activity within long-term partnerships.
o some believe that St. Paul is referring to homosexual temple
prostitution, done in the worship of the Goddess Aphrodite, and that a
careful study of Romans 1:23 reveals this connection.
o some scholars interpret the passage differently: in Greek society of the
time, male homosexuality and bisexuality were regarded as a natural
activity for some people. The "men with men" clause is a translation of
the original Greek word for pederasty which was commonly practiced at the
time by adult males with male youth. Thus Paul might have been criticizing
child sexual abuse.
Traditionally, people have carried their beliefs about sexual orientation
to this verse and interpreted the passage accordingly. The verse appears
to be somewhat vague, and perhaps should not be interpreted as a blanket
prohibition of all same-sex activities.
* I Corinthians 6:9 Paul lists a many activities that will prevent people
from inheriting the Kingdom of God (heaven). We have studied this verse as
it appears in 24 English versions of the Bible and found that two
activities in Verse 9 have been variously translated as:
o effeminate which covers a wide range of male behavior such as being
unmanly, lacking virility, decadent, soft.
o homosexuals, described as men who have sexual relations with other men,
abusers of themselves with men, sodomites and perverts. It is not clear
whether lesbians are included in this condemnation.
o male prostitutes, also described as men kept for unnatural purposes. It
is not clear whether the term "male prostitutes is restricted to
homosexuals or may also include men who are heterosexual prostitutes.
o catamites, also described as boy prostitute. This is a young male who is
kept as a sexual partner of an adult male.
The original Greek text describes the second of the two behaviors as
malakoi arsenokoitai. Malakoi means soft; the meaning of arsenokoitai has
been lost. The phrase was once used to refer to a male temple prostitute.
Some sources in the early Church interpreted the phrase as referring to
people of soft morals; i.e. unethical. That may well be the correct
meaning, because presumably people from that era would have still known
the meaning of the word arsenokoitai. At the time of Martin Luther, it was
interpreted as referring to masturbation . More recently, it has been
translated as referring to homosexuals. Each translator seem to take
whatever activity that their group particularly disapproves of at the time
and uses it in this verse.
The correct translation for the first behavior appears to be catamites, a
boy or young male who engaged in sexual activities with men. A footnote to
the New American Bible (3) reads:
"The Greek word translated as "boy prostitutes" [in 1 Cor. 6:9] designated
catamites, i.e. boys or young men who were kept for purposes of
prostitution, a practice not uncommon in the Greco-Roman world....The term
translated "practicing homosexuals" refers to adult males who indulged in
homosexual practices with such boys."
It would appear that the best guess translation for these two behaviors
might be: "male homosexual child abusers and the boys that they rape". We
agree with the Roman Catholic translators that the two behaviors probably
relate to that small minority of male homosexuals who are child rapists
and the male children that they sexually abuse. The verse has no relation
to consentual sex between adults of the same gender.
* I Corinthians 6:9 Paul lists a many activities that will prevent people
from inheriting the Kingdom of God (heaven). We have studied this verse as
it appears in 24 English versions of the Bible and found that two
activities in Verse 9 have been variously translated as:
o effeminate which covers a wide range of male behavior such as being
unmanly, lacking virility, decadent, soft.
o homosexuals, described as men who have sexual relations with other men,
abusers of themselves with men, sodomites and perverts. It is not clear
whether lesbians are included in this condemnation.
o male prostitutes, also described as men kept for unnatural purposes. It
is not clear whether the term "male prostitutes is restricted to
homosexuals or may also include men who are heterosexual prostitutes.
o catamites, also described as boy prostitute. This is a young male who is
kept as a sexual partner of an adult male.
The original Greek text describes the second of the two behaviors as
malakoi arsenokoitai. Malakoi means soft; the meaning of arsenokoitai has
been lost. The phrase was once used to refer to a male temple prostitute.
Some sources in the early Church interpreted the phrase as referring to
people of soft morals; i.e. unethical. That may well be the correct
meaning, because presumably people from that era would have still known
the meaning of the word arsenokoitai. At the time of Martin Luther, it was
interpreted as referring to masturbation . More recently, it has been
translated as referring to homosexuals. Each translator seem to take
whatever activity that their group particularly disapproves of at the time
and uses it in this verse.
The correct translation for the first behavior appears to be catamites, a
boy or young male who engaged in sexual activities with men. A footnote to
the New American Bible (3) reads:
"The Greek word translated as "boy prostitutes" [in 1 Cor. 6:9] designated
catamites, i.e. boys or young men who were kept for purposes of
prostitution, a practice not uncommon in the Greco-Roman world....The term
translated "practicing homosexuals" refers to adult males who indulged in
homosexual practices with such boys."
It would appear that the best guess translation for these two behaviors
might be: "male homosexual child abusers and the boys that they rape". We
agree with the Roman Catholic translators that the two behaviors probably
relate to that small minority of male homosexuals who are child rapists
and the male children that they sexually abuse. The verse has no relation
to consentual sex between adults of the same gender.
* 1 Tim 1:9-10 again refers to malakoi arsenokoitai which has been
variously translated as homosexuals, sexual perverts etc. Again, the
original meaning of the text as been lost, and the comment bears no
relationship to consentual homosexual sexual activity.
* Jude 7 refers to the people of Sodom as "giving themselves over to
fornication and going after strange flesh". Strange flesh has been
variously translated as perverted sensuality, unnatural lust, lust of men
for other men, and perversion. Again, it is unclear what is being referred
to here. Some biblical scholars interpret this as referring to an ancient
Jewish legend that the women of Sodom engaged in sexual intercourse with
angels.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary:
* There are no references in the Bible to committed homosexual relationships.
* Homosexual activity in the temple by male prostitutes is clearly
prohibited by the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament).
* Prostitution, both heterosexual and homosexual is generally condemned.
* Sexual abuse of boys by adult males is condemned
* St. Paul considered at least some male and female homosexual acts to be
forbidden, but it is unclear precisely which acts are included. He may
have been referring to temple prostitution, to people who are not innately
gay, lesbian or bisexual engaging in homosexual acts, to child sexual
abuse or group sexual orgies. One should note that Paul also condemned
women preaching (1 Cor 14:34) or wearing gold or pearls (1 Tim 2:11). He
also accepted and did not condemn the institution of slavery. Some
Christians feel that his writings are not a useful guide for ethics and
morals in the 20th Century.
* Jesus made many hundreds of statements regarding belief and behavior.
However He never mentioned homosexuality.
* There are two Biblical same-sex relationships (one between two women,
the other two men) reported in the Bible in a positive light. They appear
to have progressed well beyond friendship. They were likely homosexual
affairs, although not necessarily sexually active relationships:
o Ruth 1:16, 2:10-11 between Ruth and Naomi
o 1 Samuel 18:1-4, 1 Samuel 20:41-42 and 2 Samuel 1:25-26 between David
and Jonathan. (Some translations of the Bible distort the original Hebrew
text, particularly of 1 Samuel 20)
* It is the subject of endless debate whether St. Paul's prohibition of at
least some homosexual acts was:
o for the people in the vicinity of the Mediterranean during the 1st
Century CE, or
o for all people, forever.
One can argue that the ancient Israelites were surrounded by warlike
tribes. Their fertility was very important if the group was to survive.
The early Christian church was persecuted by the Roman government and by
the Jewish religious leaders. Homosexuals tend to have few children; thus
their presence would be met with opposition. At the end of the 20th
Century, conditions are the exact opposite; we are threatened by our
excessive fertility.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Useful References
1. For more information on the Sodom, Gommorah and Gibeah stories, see:
http://student.uq.edu.au/~s101014/HMPGE2.html#page2
2. For an analysis of some of the references to homosexuality in the
Bible, see: http://www.theshop.net/information/homo1.htm This is the home
page of Daniel A. Helminiak, Ph.D., author of the book: "What the Bible
Really Says about Homosexuality", Alamo Square Press, San Francisco CA
(1994)
3. "New American Bible", Catholic Book Publishing Co., (1986), P. 249
--
Pax Christi,
• Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
Jesus is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
To send e-mail, remove your hat
Pastor Dave
Ninure...@Rainbow-Christian.tk (• Ninure Saunders)
spake thusly:
>WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY
It says that homosexual acts are sin.
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34
"Faith is not an intellectual belief.
Faith is a belief with legs on it."
- Adrian Rogers
Joe Blow
> On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 12:34:17 GMT,
> Ninure...@Rainbow-Christian.tk (• Ninure Saunders)
> spake thusly:
>
>
>
>
>>WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY
>
>
> It says that homosexual acts are sin.
Not according to the information that you secretly
snipped. Perhaps you claim does not stand up well
against it.
--
Joe
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
> markwise wrote:
>> bob young wrote:
<snip>
>> I've seen things today that can only be explained as a miracle. A
>> friend of mine had terminal cancer, he was given 6 months to live.
>> Three months after being given that notice he was seeing his doctor for
>> a checkup and the cancer had disappeared. The doctor was dumbfounded
>> and said he had no medical explanation for what happened. This very
>> well could have been God's hands at work answering prayer.
>
> Very long Y A W N
> You conveniently overlooked the millions that do die of cancer.
If the millions lived (such would be common place, and wouldn't be a
miracle, but the one who died would be seen as *rare*
> I suppose your friend was spared by your imaginary god and the other
> millions
> allowed to die?
No one died, they moved on to their next life
> Why?
To show us God's power
> In any case, you skirt the question, my point was 'any miracles like
> walking on
> water or feeding multitudes with five loaves and fishes', not obscure
> claims
> that none can verify.
Guess what ? If we were to bring up these "walking on water" "feeding
multitudes with five loaves and fishes"... Which have been reported, many
times, by many, such are *still* "obsscure claims that none can verify"...
Not even pictures, or eyewitness accounts are received with any more awe by
unbelievers than the "Very long Y A W N" you just gave the healing of
a case of cancer
> Of course you could always go to a Benny Hinn Show, he
> has miracles on stage every week, but the trouble is they are cheap lies
> and
> stunts, just like your miracle.
Such are all miracles seen by people like yourself, as Moses told the rich
man in hell, "even if we send them someone from the dead, *they will not
believe*"
> Try harder next time and give me a *verifiable* miracle.
For people like yourself, no such animal exists.
> Thanks
For what ? Something for you to reject out of hand ?
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
"Barry OGrady" <athei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:lgj632h9c23k0f6mf...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 20:05:09 -0500, "Glenn \(Christian Mystic\)"
> <christi...@ev1.net> wrote:
>>"Pastor Dave" <1news-gr...@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote in message
>>news:nrm2n1psslpksbm91...@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 18:15:47 -0700, "Richard Dawkins"
>>> <Daw...@Hell.com> spake thusly:
<snip>
>>> I don't feel sorry for them. They know what they're doing.
>>> I do feel sad however, that they don't share in the joy of
>>> eternal life.
>
> Do you really think eternal life will be a joy? Being stuck in the
> presence
> of God for an eternity would be hell.
Some see Heaven and Hell as the *same* place ! Sure presents an interesting
take on Universal Salvation.
See Ya in Heaven Barry :-)
> Be of good cheer though, for there is no eternal life.
Such would not be something to cheer about
>>Thank God, you aren't the judge...
>
> Thankfully God isn't the judge.
> Do you understand that God is in no position to judge anybody>'
You get this from God's God ? Because you don't qualify to decide such
issues.
You forget *already* ?
> God can only...
Do whatever He wants !
> judge himself on his effectiveness as creator, and I doubt
> his pride would allow him to find himself lacking.
Nor can anyone do anything about it
>>> --
>>> Pastor Dave Raymond
>
> '"I will call no being good who is not what I mean when I apply that
> epithet to my fellow creatures;
> and if such a creature can sentence me to hell for not so calling him, to
> hell I will go." -- John
> Stewart Mill'
Have *fun*
> Barry
> =====
> Home page
> http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
> On Thu, 6 Apr 2006 18:57:36 -0500, "Glenn \(Christian Mystic\)"
>>"Barry OGrady" <athei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:lgj632h9c23k0f6mf...@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 20:05:09 -0500, "Glenn \(Christian Mystic\)"
>>> <christi...@ev1.net> wrote:
>>>>"Pastor Dave" <1news-gr...@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote in
>>>>message
>>>>news:nrm2n1psslpksbm91...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 18:15:47 -0700, "Richard Dawkins"
>>>>> <Daw...@Hell.com> spake thusly:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>>> I don't feel sorry for them. They know what they're doing.
>>>>> I do feel sad however, that they don't share in the joy of
>>>>> eternal life.
>>>
>>> Do you really think eternal life will be a joy? Being stuck in the
>>> presence of God for an eternity would be hell.
>>
>>Some see Heaven and Hell as the *same* place ! Sure presents an
>>interesting
>>take on Universal Salvation.
>>
>>See Ya in Heaven Barry :-)
>
It is not in my hands.
>>> Be of good cheer though, for there is no eternal life.
>>
>>Such would not be something to cheer about
>
> Its a far better alternative to being stuck with God.
>
>>>>Thank God, you aren't the judge...
>>>
>>> Thankfully God isn't the judge.
>>> Do you understand that God is in no position to judge anybody>'
>>
>>You get this from God's God ?
>
> Does God have a God.?
If He did, He would not be God, but instead His God would be God
>>Because you don't qualify to decide such issues.
>
> Have you forgotten? We get to decide what is good for us.
Useless function, as we haven't the power to bring about the result, *only*
God has the power, He decides and it happens.
Put simply, we don't get to decide, He does.
But you forgot this conversation already ? Please, see a doctor about your
memory disorders
>>You forget *already* ?
>
> You don't understand, do you?
> God won't judge any of his creations.
>>> God can only...
>>
>>Do whatever He wants !
>
> God can't exist.
Barry, it isn't in your power.
>>> judge himself on his effectiveness as creator, and I doubt
>>> his pride would allow him to find himself lacking.
>>
>>Nor can anyone do anything about it
>
> But we can try. We spend most of our time trying to overcome God.
I am not one of your "we", some of us know such will only work against us,
and found it far more pleasant to live within His will
>>>>> --
>>>>> Pastor Dave Raymond
>>>
>>> '"I will call no being good who is not what I mean when I apply that
>>> epithet to my fellow creatures; and if such a creature can sentence
>>> me to hell for not so calling him, to hell I will go." -- John
>>> Stewart Mill'
>>
>>Have *fun*
>
> Great quote, eh?
Of an idiot.
>>> Barry
>>
>>Glenn (Christian Mystic)
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
"Pastor Dave" <_-_Anania...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:klr4321vrmds9h3uq...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 12:34:17 GMT,
> spake thusly:
>
>>WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY
>
> It says that homosexual acts are sin.
Only in English texts, and those of other languages who borrow from English,
or are translated through / from English texts.
All non-English texts translated *directly* from the Greek have no mention
of homosexuality being a sin.
Why is this ? Could it be, that the English speaking religious populations
have some sort of *bias* that the translators were *forced to*, or wanted to
interject into the texts ? Obviously so
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
"Dore" <dorewil...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:_%vcf.24576$w_6.24161@trndny09...> news:1131506867.7...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Christ is the fulfillment of the sabbath. He is our sabbath-rest now.
>> Christians need not follow any sabbath day for Christ has fulfilled
>> that Law.
>
Then Jesus both failed to do what He came to do, and lied
Pastor Frank
news:71fj32p7m4tvhhikm...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 12:16:17 -0500, "Glenn \(Christian Mystic\)"
> <christi...@ev1.net> wrote:
>>"Pastor Dave" <_-_Anania...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:klr4321vrmds9h3uq...@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 12:34:17 GMT,
>>> Ninure...@Rainbow-Christian.tk (. Ninure Saunders)
>>> spake thusly:
>>>
>>>>WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY
>>>
>>> It says that homosexual acts are sin.
>>
>>Only in English texts, and those of other languages who borrow from
>>English,
>>or are translated through / from English texts.
>>
>>All non-English texts translated *directly* from the Greek have no mention
>>of homosexuality being a sin.
>>
>>Why is this ? Could it be, that the English speaking religious populations
>>have some sort of *bias* that the translators were *forced to*, or wanted
>>to
>>interject into the texts ? Obviously so
>
> Christian
> requirements of 'normality'.
>
You still don't get it, do you Barry. Heaven is full of "abnormal"
people. The only thing they all have in common is, the all repented and all
are forgiven. See below
Pastor Frank
Jesus in Jn:8:36: If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be
free indeed.
Jesus in Lk:15:7: I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven
over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons,
which need no repentance.
2Cor:5:17: Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old
things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
Pastor Frank
>
> He wasn't an idiot when he wrote that.
> '"I will call no being good who is not what I mean when I apply that
> epithet to my fellow creatures; and if such a creature can sentence
> me to hell for not so calling him, to hell I will go." -- John Stewart
> Mill'
>
God is not a creature, but an ideal. if you can't see that, than you are in
hell already, because nothing and no one, ever lives up to your
expectations. See below
Pastor Frank
Jesus in Mt:8:12: But the children of Satan's kingdom shall be cast into
outer darkness: There shall be wailing (of interminable complaints) and
gnashing of teeth (in frustration and impotent rage).