I can't possibly be creating a god based on my opinions and desires, because as a red blooded male I would naturally really enjoy having sex with many different women. I would enjoy taking things that don't belong to me so I get them for free. If the authors of the Bible and the followers of the literal word wanted to make up a god to suit their own desires and ambitions, do you really think that 3/4 of the Bible would say what it says? I don't think so at all.
Just by the way, the second commandment (it is pretty clear even if you doubt the authorship of scripture) is do not make idols for yourselves. This doesn't just mean lttle stone carvings that you worship instead of God (that is covered in the first commandment), it means do not create a god to fit your own desires and opinions. That's what you're doing here.
And that argument is supposing that there is no element of choice in the homosexual lifestly. But even that argument is irrelevant and less important than the one just discussed. The main problem which I'm consistently seeing here is that you seem to be unwilling to accept the Bible and its message. Why not? Because it does not fit with current society or your own personal opinion? Who is Christ for you? Who do you think Christ is and what do you think He did for us?
@GoldenbanjoDJ You mentioned Christ. Well Christ never spoke one word against homosexuals nor homosexuality. Even God didn't speak one word against homosexuals nor homosexuality.
If it's so important and such a big crime, then why didn't God put homosexuality on his list of commandments?
The only forbidden sex in the commandments is between Married Men and Women.
Your following false prophets. You should try to follow God and Jesus, it would do you some good.
As such, when you talk about the example of murder (and actually all of the other ten commandments and laws of scripture apply to this very same reality) as being something you are not inherantly born with that you cannot change, Jesus clearly tells us that we have an in built nature that goes against God and breaks His laws all the time. Everything that is 'in-built' and not a 'choice' (as you state anyway) is not therefore acceptable.
"You seem unable (or unwilling) to comprehend the obvious, that God may create men who murder, but He does not create them AS murderers." Jesus talks thoroughly about the human mindset, particularly in Matt 5:27. From a reading of Jesus' words we can clearly infer that sin is not only in the doing, but the thinking. If you hate, you have murdered in God's eyes (Matt 5:21-22). In this sense, considering everyone has committed sins of the spirit, murder etc. is not a 'choice' as you define it.
"If you love me, keep my commands". Love God by loving Jesus, show you love Jesus by keeping his commands that he, if you believe is He Triune, set in the whole Bible. Why do you think that one cannot love their neighbour unless they bend to their every desire? Does a mother show more love for her child by stopping him from playing with fire, or by letting him bun his hands? Similarly with our Christian brothers. We can love AND attend to the need for salvation. They are not mutually exclusive.
@GoldenbanjoDJ, if you are not rational or educated enough to see the difference between a loving relationship between two consenting adults, and...abortion, then I'm afraid you cannot coherently comment on this subject. Sorry.
I am rational enough to know that Jesus would not approve of either based on what was written in the Bible and what Jesus said of things written in the Bible. You go ahead and feel free to cherry pick bits and bobs but know this; Jesus Himself said that He had not come to change any of the law. God is unchanging. If you think He is, your God is certainly not the triune God of Father Son and Holy Spirit.
Furthermore, your very name is erroneous. God creates every single person on the planet. That includes adulterers, liars and murderers. Just because He creates people with a free will to disobey Him, does not justify these actions. What if my name was GodCreatesMurderers? That is true, yet it does not justify it. U r blaming God for your sin. How can you believe in the Gospel of Salvation when u deny that there is anything wrong with you?! And you talk to me about being rational!
Finally, I am rational and educated enough to know that ANY sin is enough to keep you from God. If you think that Gay marriage is less worse than abortion, fair enough, but God doesn't work by your standards. He doesn't equate less worse with 'right', He still sees 'SIN' at the end of the day. God created the law and He maintains it. Abortion is murder. God has a law for that. God also has a law for homosexuality. In God's eyes, both are wrong and both keep us from Him. Sorry!
@GBDJ, well, your personal opinion proves...what your personal opinion is. Nothing more, nothing less. There's no proof anywhere that JESUS would single out gay people, from among all the children whom God creates, to condemn. Your wishful thinking doesn't mean you can actually speak for Him, or fill in the blanks to what isn't there. When the human beings who write or interpret the Bible contradict God's will, as they do here (being gay is not a "sin"), then it's the men who are wrong, not God.
That is interesting. I haven't used personal opinion anywhere in my argument. I'm stating truth found in the Bible, the very Bible which both condemns us and saves us. Jesus doesn't hate the woman caught in adultery, correct, but he tells her to 'sin no more'. This is exactly the same as the gay issue, and in fact ANY issue with mankind. But we have to realise we are sinning and have gone our own way before we can accept the need to be saved. I'm not filling in blanks...
@GoldenbanjoDJ, it's your personal opinion that anything in the Bible represents any truth at all. With all its translations, editing, interpretations and misinterpretations throughout the years, thinking of the Bible as anything other than an interesting book of fables and myths is your right, but it's no actual concrete proof of anything.
..... Jesus states very clearly in Matt 5:17 that He did not come to abolish the law or the prophets. As the unchanging God incarnate, he doesn't change his mind from OT to NT. God is unchanging. Your god changes with time, from the OT and declaring that men who sleep with men are abominations (Bible's words, not mine) to the NT god who doesn't care. Wrong is wrong throughout History; moral absolutism is KEY to the Bible. God and His precepts don't change. Jesus doesn't single out gay people...
... but he doesn't single out paedofiles either. Does that make it right? On the contrary, with Jesus declaring that He has not come to abolish the law, it therefore stands that the law presented in the OT still stands. He doesn't have to re-go over every single law as the Jewish people would have known it already. This is why the OT and the NT flow so completely into each other.
So are you a Christian, or just a troll with that name? Where do you get your truth from, if not from the Bible?
I would also suggest that it is the modern interpretation that homosexuality is not a 'sin' that is most likely to be a misinterpretation. If you hold to the 'translations, editing, interpretations and misinterpretations' craic then you will logically recognise that the Bible in its earliest form was the most correct version. Therefore, at earlier periods in History, the Bible is more likely to be correct. The argument that Homosexuality is not sin is a VERY recent concept.
@GoldenbanjoDJ, of course, there were not even words in the original text to mean "homosexual", so what's really a misinterpretation and mistake (well, one of many, really) on the part of the Bible authors is that being gay ever WAS a sin. Such an idea is only wishful thinking on the part of those who wish to condemn minorities, and use their convenient interpretation of "god" as an excuse.
The fact that the Bible states that a man who lies with another man is an abomination speaks volumes regarding God's stance on homosexuality. The original writers do not exactly require a word for 'homosexual' to relay the obvious connotations here.Man that lies with man = homosexual. It's wishful thinking to suggest that the lack of a specific word renders the whole discussion foundationless.
Again back to the fall reality; God creates people who murder. ur answer to that? incompetence? faulty?
I've come back to this because something has occured to me: Your whole ethos is completely contradictory to the Gospel message and the role of Jesus as saviour. Why do we need a saviour if people like you are going to run around saying 'God created us like this, we are acceptable'? God created every single one of us, and every single one of us has fallen short. Is that God's fault. Can God, as a just judge, take us for who we REALLY are? No he can't!
What we are seeing now and what you have been arguing from the very MOMENT you created your Youtube name is going far beyond the homosexuality debate into a discussion regarding the need for a saviour. Jesus said I am the way the truth and the life, as well as many other well known phrases that link Him and only Him to God and the way to eternal life. Your 'I was made this way' theory suggests you think you are acceptable before God and thus you go against Jesus and His teachings
GBDJ proclaims, "Your 'I was made this way' theory suggests you think you are acceptable before God and thus you go against Jesus and His teachings"
Everyone is acceptable before God, if they follow His will and direction for their lives, and remain true to themselves and the way he made them, whether this be str8 or gay. Going against YOUR personal opinion and beliefs are not on a par with "going against Jesus". See, most people don't accept that you & He are on the same level.
No one at all is acceptable before God. "For all have fallen short". The whole Gospel message is about how we cannot be acceptable before God and therefore need someone else (Jesus) to save us. You aren't going against my opinion, you are going against what is written in the Bible, so your beef is with God not me! Whilst I ground my beliefs in scripture, you are making it up as you go along, and have nothing to base your ideology or world view on....
...As a result of this egocentric creation of a mindset that is based nowhere on scripture, it is not I who is more likely to be wrong, it is you! At least my mindset actually comes from somewhere. If we remain true to ourselves as you suggests makes us 'acceptable' before God (ridiculous statement) then by God's perfect justice we will be damned on judgement day. Mankind is inherantly sinful. Remanining true to our natural way is to maintain sin, something which God cannot have near Him.
"It only "speaks volumes" about what the book's authors & apologists believe, or want to believe."
That is hilarious! You are the incarnation of your own thesis! You make it up to suit your own mindset because if you look at the actual text and base your opinion on anything tangible at all you are shown to be clearly wrong.
Leviticus 20:18. Read it. Analyse the literature. Any sort of reading will indicate that it says "as one lies with a woman", not "how you already lie with a woman"...
... (I apologise, lev 20:13) There reference is obviously to the act of sex, not "as they already do with their wives". There is absolutely no specific reference to the men being heterosexual or homosexual, but it is clear that sex with men is not a heterosexual act. Here is the classic case of people trying to find something where nothing is written, so who is really trying to justify their own personal opinion, me or you?
GBoDJ claims, "No one at all is acceptable before God."
The men who wrote the Bible, to control the masses, want you to believe that. But living a good life, & accepting the way God creates you (rather than caving in to irrational, man-made bigotry) is a good way to garner His favor. As a loving Father, He wants us to do good, be happy, & be ourselves.
"you are going against what is written in the Bible"
But I AM accepting & promoting God's will, so the Bible remains irrelevant in comparison.
@GoldenbanjoDJ wants to know, "Why do we need a saviour if people like you are going to run around saying 'God created us like this, we are acceptable'?"
Maybe you are not as acceptable, and still need to be saved.
@GoldenbanjoDJ contends, "The fact that the Bible states that a man who lies with another man is an abomination speaks volumes regarding God's stance on homosexuality"
No. It only "speaks volumes" about what the book's authors & apologists believe, or want to believe. God, Himself, makes His stance on homosexuality completely clear by continuing to create, love, & keep His gay children right here on His planet, as part of His divine plan for mankind. HE wants them here, just the way they are.
GBDJ writes, "The original writers do not exactly require a word for 'homosexual' to relay the obvious connotations here."
Of course, even to the most learned Biblical scholars, there is no one, single interpretation. Many believe that the "anti-gay" passages actually refer to hetero men being forbidden to lie with other men, as they already do with their wives. In any case, the Bible was written by men, and any of their musings take a back seat to God's choice to create gays & keep them here.
GBDJ demands, "God creates people who murder. ur answer to that?"
You seem unable (or unwilling) to comprehend the obvious, that God may create men who murder, but He does not create them AS murderers. They choose such behavior, themselves. And chosen behavior has no correlation whatsoever to innate, unchangeable characteristics like skin or eye color, sexual orientation, being left-handed, etc. The Lord creates some men as heterosexuals; their murdering their wives is their own doing.
@GoldenbanjoDJ, being gay is not a "sin", unless you think God is an incompetent boob with a faulty design system, Who continues creates and keeps an entire community of His children here on earth without knowing He's made them wrong, LOL. I take God's competence for granted, and trust in His will, judgment, and wisdom in populating His earth with diversity, including His gay children. I believe that God's will triumphs over man's prejudices and ignorance any day. But that's just me.
“”being gay is not a "sin", unless you think God is an incompetent boob with a faulty design system, Who continues creates and keeps an entire community “”
I guess that simply makes pedophilia simply another expression of God's diversity then correct? That makes it morally sound if consent is involved. The mentally and physically handicapped are also examples of God's loving diversity.
This man is so wrong. He really has no clue. You can still love your neighbor just because you don't agree with what he is doing. Hate sin and love the sinner. This preacher is really talking out of his you know what. Sorry to say. Wow. He takes the word of God and mashes it all up to fit an agenda.
I think this priest is right. Let me add also that God never put homosexuality on his list of commandments of things not to do. Jesus also never spoke one word against homosexuals nor homosexualiy.
This guy is evil like skeletor! These are the type of people who should be burned at a stake with their books burning at their feet. He is twisting up what the Bible says. I would have no problem assaulting this guy just because He is misrepresenting my God.
@Icanseeu123able God never put homosexuality on his list of commandments of things not to do. Jesus also never spoke against homosexuals. I think your misinterpreting the true God.
@iamluke123 . Luke obviously you have never read the bible because homosexuality is denounced throughout the bibe. This man is not teaching what the bible say's he is teacher what he think. Its his opinion not Gods. Nick we all struggle with thing that are sinful , Lust and homosexuality and adultry . We need to come to the Lord and ask him for help with those struggle and really want to change and it will happen. the desire will diminish and God will give you that strength. Obey God.
@tomcamp6023 I do obey God! The day I see a bible that has homosexuality on the list of commandments of things not to do, and I believe then I will change my ways. Until now I have not seen any such bible.
Also the day I see a bible that has Jesus speaking agianst homosexuality or homosexuals I will change my ways also.
I thought the bible was about God and Jesus, not about all other Tom, Dick, and Harry out there.
I only follow God and Jesus, I don't follow false prophets!
@iamluke123 . Leviticus 20:13 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a women both them have done what is detestabe. leviticus 18.22 Do not lie with a man as one lies with a women that is destestable.Corinthians 6:9-10 Do not be deceived neither the sexually inmmoral nor the idolaters nor the adulters nor the male prostitues nor Homosexual offenders will inherit the kingdom of God. THE GOOD KNEWS. CORINTHIANS 6:11 MENTIONS THAT YOU CAN INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD . TURN FROM YOU SINFUL WAYS.
@tomcamp6023 . Corinthians 6:11 You were washed you were sanctified you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the spirit of our God . .
Once you make the decsion to change you can turn to God for strength. God has given us free will and we can choose or not choose to do what is right. Choose what is right and inherit the kindom of God. If you ask God to come into your life he will. Ask with all your heart and really want to change. God bless.
@tomcamp6023 You spoke of God. Well God never put homosexualtiy on his list of commandments.
You also spoke of the Lord Jesus Christ, well the Lord Jesus Christ never spoke one word against homosexuals nor homosexuality.
Your following false prophets, turn back and follow God and Jesus and stop attacking homosexuals, because God and Jesus never attacked homosexuals nor homosexuality.
@tomcamp6023 You should read the bible. If you believe that God destroyed the city of Sodom. Then you must know that he did so only after Lot called homosexuality a wicked thing.
Lot the one that forbid homosexuals the pleasure of homosexual sex was the one that was attacked in the bible. His home was burned to the ground. He has no home. His wife was turned into a pillar of salt (there goes his sex life, right out the door)
Lot said gays can't have sex, then God made sure Lot didn't either.
So if Lot was the one in the wrong, as opposed to the people in the city committing the sin that God apparently doesn't mind, why is it that God decided to destroy sodom and its people whilst specifically telling Lot to get out and therefore saving Him? God killed the wicked and saved the righteous. Lot was righteous, not wrong!
Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt because she looked back at the city, disobeying God. Nothing to do with Lot's statement. LOL! Read it again.
lol i expected a hostile response. people who distort the bible in order to follow their own worldly feelings usually do when corrected.
did God put paedophilia in the ten commandments? your logic is erroneous. anyway, God makes it clear than man lying with man like they would with a woman is an abomination. why do you have to have homosexual desires to be on another man's lap or bosom? there is no sexuality in heaven. there is no need to reproduce- another stupid point from you
i'm following the Bible, God's unchanging word, no false prophets. you're making an idol by folliwing a god other than the Bible God. God Himself is unchanging, so if you believe that Jesus is God and you believe Him when he says He has not come to do away with the law, you will do well to realise this includes the moral law present in Leviticus. God STILL sees man lying with man as an abomination.
Fishers of men - you really think that has homosexual connotations?!?!?!?!?!
You're distorting God's word, and it seems like you don't have a problem with doing it. I can argue with people such as Godcreatedgays who has not read the Bible nor accepts its divine origin, but when there is someone who hs read it and draws such erroneous conclusions, I'm only going to argue so much. I'll have no part with someone who mangles the Bible to suit his own desires. Judgement will be even worse for people who do that.
You're trying to sell your secularist BS to the wrong person.
Show me where God said anything against paedofiles?
Show me where Jesus says anything against paedofiles?
You know FINE WELL where God calls out against Homosexuals. Of course I wasn't calling God stupid. I called you stupid. "Another STUPID point from YOU" if you could actually read. That's the whole poiunt. You make it up as you go along. You're manufacturing your own idol, of something that approves of what you do.
And you seem to have some massive trouble in distinguishing between moral law and ritual law. Jesus' death puts up a filter which allows ritual law to be tossed away. If anyone is perfect, he can follow such ritual law perfectly and go to heaven without salvation from Jesus, so they STILL stand in that sense, but seeing as NO-ONE is perfect, ritual law can be superceded by Christ's deeds for the non-perfect in the world.
But you're right, Jesus doesn't say anything about homosexuality. That is because that law is not changed by Him. He only talks of laws that are hanged by His coming ie. 'work' on the sabbath, "the sabbath is made for man, not man for the sabbath" when the disciples were 'working' by picking corn to eat. So too, the woman caught in adultery, "go now and sin no more" as opposed to 'stone her'. He gracefully forgives us gives us the chance to turn from the sinful lives that condemn us before Him..
... but in turn, he wants us to turn from our sins, like he wants the woman to turn from her adultery. He gives us that chance through Him. So too lev talks of shellfish, but later in the NT Peter has a dream in which God tells him that all foods are clean. Are you seeing a pattern? Any law that is superceded by Jesus' coming is specifically mentioned and tackled. Homosexuality is not mentioned by Jesus. Therefore, the OT law is NOT being superceded.
And I asked for a quote from where God or Jesus condemn paedofilia, because by your logic neglect of instruction means that it is allowed.
John 8:10 - "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more." Jesus as forgiving and refusing to stone the woman, yet instructing us to turn from our sinful ways. Jesus therefore supercedes this law.
Mark 7:19 - "Thus he declared all foods clean" - again superceding OT law
Now can you tell me where Jesus supercedes Leviticus 20:13?
But you will not be able to tell me where Jesus supercedes the law concerning homosexuality, because as you say, he does not mention it. The only times Jesus talks of the law is when he either uses it or supercedes it. Seeing as he never supercedes the homosexual practice, only someone with an agenda could suggest that Jesus views it as being acceptable. Man and woman relationships are also a creation ordinance, which is a BIG problem for gay theists to counter.
All of scripture is God breathed (2 Timothy 3:16) and so all is useful for instruction. Following the Bible and its teachings is to directly follow God as they are His manifestations. What do you think the Bible is? You seem to be under the impression that there is only the 4 synoptic gospels that bear any relevance
Why is preaching against homosexuals following every Tom Dick and Harry? Maybe because everyone else has it right and you are interpreting the Bible to suit yourself?
And give me a reference to say that all sex is forbidden please.
It is hilarious the extent to which people will try to create a god that accepts their homosexuality. There is NOTHING to suggest it is acceptable anywhere in the Bible. That Matthew fishers of men interpretation of yours will have me laughing for weeks LOL! Fishers of men = gay disciples. even if that was the case, they would be BECOMING gay, so homosexuality is a lifestyle choice??? now you are making sense! LOL!
You still haven't answered my original question about why Lot, who called homosexuality wicked, was saved whilst all the homosexuals were judged and killed by God at Sodom... That would be a bit of a mix up by God... "whoops I meant to tell all the homosexuals to leave and keep Lot in the city instead....error!" Seeing as God is just and God doesn't make errors, your interpretation is, again, bollocks...
Finally, the erroneous point about Adam, Even, Noah and his sons and their link to Leviticus: Adam and Eve (at least you accept their presence as literal figures in the Bible (notice how they are made male and female as well) ) and Noah came before the detailed law of Leviticus... If God intended the law regarding sex between relatives to be binding to Adam and Eve, he would have given them that law when he gave them their other law not to eat from the tree.
Also realise the fact that if God did place leviticus' instructions at the time of Adam and Eve, they would not be able to reproduce. God created one man and one woman and all mankind stemmed from there. Mankind would be doomed from the start with your logic. As well as this, biologically, the risk genetic mutation and resulting deformations and genetically determined illness is increasingly intense the further along the generational line you get.......
......due to this fact, incest between Adam's sons and daughters and Noah's sons and daughters etc etc. would have resulted in insignificant risk of genetic problems in their children in comparison to what the risk factor is today, or even in the times of leviticus. The laws, believe it or not, are there to help mankind. by the time leviticus was written, God clearly determined that it was time to introduce an incest rule because the genetic risk was too great. Even so, there is still.......
..... the possibility that Noah's sons (in Genesis, so quite a while before Levicitus) would have had babies that were genetically damaged. We live in a fallen world. God had just adminstered justice on the earth because of the sin, and so there were only a few people left. Mark 10:2-12 "For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment" shows clearly how God tries to make the best out of a bad situation, even though the 'best' may still be undesirable. IT all goes back to original sin.
Therefore, not only was there no law to condemn Adam and Eve's sons and Noah's sons, but, except from creating a new creation (which God would not do), the only option was for incest, the least worst option for a bad situation (the worst being the death of humanity). Even still, biology shows us that the dangers of incest increase exponentially as time goes by, so they may not even have needed the law of leviticus, which is written for the good of mankind. Sorry this has been long, it's complex
That's all you can say - "You're so full of BS" and "You know nothing of God and Jesus". It is I who have been providing Biblical Truth, and I'm positive that God has been watching this conversation and seen that. The only quotes you provide are erroneous interpretations such as Fishers of men (LOL - I laugh every time I think about it) and a made-up version of Lot's story. You cannot and have not answered ANY of my questions, but I hav answered ALL of urs and done so with the Bible
I have taken the time to write plenty of posts not because I want to spread hate (look at who the first one to use an ad hominem in this discussion was - it was YOU) but because the Bible teaches that scripture is useful for correcting, and that we should be correcting our brothers with love. Paul corrected many churches in his epistles because they had strayed from God's word. It's the duty of Christians to make sure others are staying true. You are preaching a false religion.........
...... and Christians SHOULD come in and stop the destruction of God's word, because it is the people who make up God's word as they go along that are more dangerous to Christianity than atheism and Islam combined, because they such the very lifeblood out of Christ. You don't even sound like you know the bible, so how can you know God and Jesus? The truth hurts, and I'm not sorry to be pointing it out to you. I am sorry that you feel I am hating though. The internet is difficult to convey tone
YES YOU'RE RIGHT!!! According to Levicitus we ALL deserve death!!!!! THIS IS ABSOLUTELY CENTRAL TO THE GOSPEL MESSAGE!!! Leviticus, Deuteronomy, the Ten Commandments AND Jesus' own words in Matt 5:27-28 revolve around the message of the law. The law condemns us and only Jesus saves us. If we live by the law, we are doomed and if we live by Jesus' saving grace and we love Him, John 14:15 states that we would obey his commands. Jesus told toe woman to 'sin no more'.......
...... and He does so because he recognises that the OT law on adultery still stands, and that disobeying the law is sin. Disobeying Leviticus is sin! We are ALL guilty of it and Christians who understand this are saved. The law of leviticus is NOT about putting people to death now that Jesus has come to save. Why are you incapable of comprehending SIMPLE Bible Theology?! We follow Leviticus now not to put people to death, but to KEEP GOD/JESUS' COMMANDS, because we love Jesus!
I have some news for you. I've already quoted 2 Timothy 3:16, that ALL scripture is God breathed. I will spell it out for you: Genesis, Exodus, LEVITICUS, numbers, deuteronomy, joshua, judges, ruth, samuel 1+2, kings 1+2, Chronicles 1+2, ezra, nehamiah, esther, job, psalms, proverbs, ecclesiastes, song of solomon, isaiah, jerimiah, lamentations, ezekiel, daniel, hosea, joel, amos, obadiah, jonah, micah, nahum, habakkuk, zephaniah, haggai, zecheriah and malachi IS ALL GOD'S WORD. I follow God
The prologue of John's Gospel teaches of the word (logos in Greek). It teaches that the word was there in the beginning and that the word created everything. Clearly the logos is God (I won't go into the reasons John used 'logos' in this discussion, it might be too difficult for you). Then the prologue teaches that the word became incarnate (that means became flesh). So the word is also Jesus (doctrine of the Trinity). Therefore, Jesus AND God both created the world and both made the law.
Because God and Jesus as one both made the law, by following the law I AM following God and Jesus. But I'm thankful that the law does not save me, because no-one measures up to it. I am saved through Jesus and I love Him so much that I want to obey what he says. The two logically go together. You're like a person who says that you are someone's friend, and them bitches about them behind their back, or fails to display any friendly characteristics towards your 'friend'.
mate honestly i don't want any more bad feeling between us. i've said all that i have to say. you can take it on board if you like, or you can discard it. it's your choice
@GoldenbanjoDJ Oh by the way, my Mother's name is Elizabeth. Elizabeth was the one who was carrying the holy spirit.
Mary Visits Elizabeth 39 At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40 where she entered Zechariah’s home and greeted Elizabeth. 41 When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.
@GoldenbanjoDJ There is no wheres in the bible that says the child Mary had was filled with the holy spirit.
How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?” 35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you
COME ON YOU, AND OVERSHADOW YOU, does not mean that it was in Mary.
The Holy Spirit was in Elizabeth. My Mother's name.
By the way if you want to read this story, it's in the book of LUKE.
@redgoldbluephantom Show me from the original Greek manuscripts that Paul would disagree with that. More importantly Paul was a man. He was NOT God. He had his own opinions just like you have your own opinions. Opinion is not necessarily reality.
Paul's letters are part of the cannon of the New Testament. People who through faith accept it as the word of God are Christians. Those who believe otherwise are not. The priest in the video is proclaiming something that is foreign and contrary to that faith - as found through the words of Paul as well as the testimony of the Old Testament. That is the problem.
There is a "litmus" test for Christianity, it is usually referred to the tenants of the Christian faith. Among those tenants that makes a person an adherent of the Christian religion are the belief in the divinity of Christ, the acceptance of all the canonical books of the New Testament and the belief that the Bible is the inspired Word of God.
@redgoldbluephantom The belief that the entire Bible is the inspired word of God is not a litmus test to be a Christian. Maybe in your Church that is the case but not in all Christian Churches.
Just because a group calls itself Christian does not automatically make itself Christian in the same way that just because a person calls his/her relationship with another person a ''marriage'' does not automatically make it so.
The common orthodoxy held by Protestants and the historic Christian Churches are their ''litmus'' test that they use to define themselves as Christians. This is why the adherents to those denominations do not consider groups like the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses to be Christian. I agree with them.
@redgoldbluephantom I don't agree with them. I think that as the Latter-day Saints have taught from early on that there is much more to the Gospel (the universe and the message of infinite truth) than has been understood heretofore. It was the genius of Mormonism that taught that we are not the only planet that God has created. That there are infinite number of worlds without number. Also that God's process of teaching is infinite and not confined to one book but numberless revelations.
@redgoldbluephantom I also don't agree with the limitations that Protestantism and Catholicism place on humanity. Even Mormonism (as a modern religion) has struggles with that. It has come up against the same kinds of problems that the early Christian Church faced in its process of growth. It is a very very fascinating, dynamic faith that is on its way to become the next major world faith. There are too many questions that traditional Christianity just does not answer.
@redgoldbluephantom I believe traditional Christianity though important has lost many principles because of its choice to embrace war & love of hierarchy (especially in the Roman Catholic church) over love of God. Orthodoxy is what the leadership has often chosen over the love of God. Sinead O'Connor was right on about the Catholic Church holding the Holy Spirit hostage with regard to the lies they have held up to protect their image when they have committed horrific crimes against humanity.
@redgoldbluephantom I have discussed this with Roman Catholics and former Catholics. It is a travesty and I find it appalling that you would say that about Ms. O'Connor. Very appalling to blame the victim (she was victimized herself) as opposed to the victimizers. Sure the majority of Catholics (and likely most Catholic leaders) do not condone the abuse; however when the top leaders continue to cover it up to make the Church look like it's spotless, they are guilty of the greater sin.
Ms. O'Connor was never blamed for anything except pushing her own agenda (discredit traditional Christianity) and I didn't comment on this page about the abuse because the subject of abuse is not the topic of the video (the ''Catholic things'' are being brought up as peripheral, but not primary issues). My opinion about the abusers is very clear on other pages.
O'Connor being a victim of abuse does not make her actions and statements immune from reasonable criticism.
@redgoldbluephantom So now when someone speaks out against Papal abuse or against the evil's that too many Catholic clergy are involved with they are pushing their own agenda. I see how it works.
Ms. O'Connor's agenda is quite clear, she has stated it several times and through staged productions that she participated in (e.g. depicting Mary in a dishonorable way). Let us not forget that she isn't the only person speaking about the abuses. Some of them have more merit than others.
@redgoldbluephantom YOu mean she has depicted Mary in a similar way as Madonna did? I just don't get that kind of stuff. It's not uncommon in the rock and roll music world.
Depicting Mary as a woman who spouts off obscenities is much in line with Ms. O'Connor's anti-religious ideas. Whether it is common or not, the motivation for doing such things is always questionable.
The priest in the video, on the other hand, might be motivated out of a misguided sense of compassion, but he is making unwarranted assumptions about Jesus and the people who voted for Proposition 8.
@redgoldbluephantom Well I don't know enough about Sinead's motivation or of any of the incidents you are describing to make any kind of comment on it. As for the priest in the video there are many different mainline Christian Churches who have much the same approach as this priest does on the issue of prop 8. I don't assume that everyone who voted for prop 8 did so for exactly the same reasons. There has been negative things said and done on both sides. It has been a very polarizing issue.
@redgoldbluephantom That's your own personal opinion. There are religions who think that your faith is apostate and fallen from the original teachings of Christ and that the Bible has errors in it. They believe that this warranted a restoration of priesthood authority and that God sent new prophets and apostles to restore what was lost. Did it ever occur to you that what you have believed all of these years might be flawed?
@redgoldbluephantom The question must be asked that if marriage equality for same gender couples does help those relationships to become much more grounded then will those stronger & more stable relationships have a positive or a negative effect on society as a whole? Does marriage equality reduce promiscuity? Does marriage equality also help make LGBT people take these commitments more seriously? Does marriage equality also help LGBT be more integrated into the whole of society?
Using the misnomer ''marriage equality'' detracts from the heart of the issue. Proposition 8 gets to the important question of whether the composition of a committed relationship is essential to the definition of marriage. From a religious perspective (the subject of this video), the question should be, ''What would Jesus think about Proposition 8?'' Not, ''what do people assume would be the societal benefit of changing the definition of marriage?''
@redgoldbluephantom We don't really know what Jesus would have said about proposition 8 because all we have are the words He said about other issues and there was nothing discussed about gay people let alone gay marriage. He seemed to look at celibacy as the gold standard to live by. Nobody really knows exactly what He would have said about the prop 8 issue. He may have said that civil marriage is not much of an institution at all; that marriage through the Church is what really counts.
@redgoldbluephantom Perhaps but of course there are other faith's (including non-Christian non-Jewish faith's) who do not believe in the Bible and reject it as a myth. These folks should have the opportunity for a civil equal marriage recognized by the government.
@redgoldbluephantom Also I think the priest here is speaking more about letting people have their free agency and not trying to control others. Also there are hundreds of thousands of gay couples who are raising children (most of those kids grow up to be heterosexual adults by the way) and the benefits of civil marriage are a blessing to all involved and there are tremendous benefits for the kids as well as the couples.
@Starvalleybotany The priest is speaking about his own opinion. By making unwarranted assumptions about Jesus and preaching such as if it were Jesus' ''position'' borders on blasphemy.
@redgoldbluephantom It's Ironic that my own Church put so much time & money into the support of prop 8. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is deeply committed to marriage & family to the point that marriage & family are one of the pillars of the faith. The Irony is that the Church puts its greatest value in the concept of marriage for time & all eternity that is sealed in the Holy Temple or "House of the Lord" & that will likely never be something same sex couples will experience.
@Starvalleybotany A man/woman couple is not the same as man/man couple. Even in a secular sense, the difference is significant. The Mormons have this understanding and most of the adults in California concurred.
In a religious sense, what the priest is preaching has no support from the Bible.
@redgoldbluephantom Yes the Mormons believe that; however, they (just as many Evangelicals, many Catholics, etc.) have every right to exercise their rights within the sphere of their religious influence. Where that influence ends is within the area of civil rights. These faiths are flourishing in states like Iowa, Connecticut and Massachusetts who support civil same sex marriage rights.
@Starvalleybotany Actually, in those states the decision to change the definition did not come through a vote, it was mandated by a court or an overreaching government. Actually in places such as Boston and Washington D.C. Christian institutions were adversely affected by the change. For example, Catholic adoption agencies were forced to shut down due to the government demanding they adopt to gay couples - even though there were alternatives for gay people.
@redgoldbluephantom The government should not demand that a religious institution adopt to certain couples. I for one would not seek out a religious organization that is opposed to my innate being to adopt children through. That would be absurd. So in that area I think that a religious institution should be exempt partly because there are so many different adoption agencies.
@Starvalleybotany The problem is that the adoption agency issue is only the beginning of the floodgates that will continue to hinder religious freedoms. The Bishops of the Catholic Church pleaded with the governments in Washington D.C. and Massachusetts for exemptions. Ironically, the very people who changed the definition of marriage in the name of "tolerance" and "compassion" failed to practice it themselves.
@redgoldbluephantom I don't agree with that. I think a religious institution should be able to adopt children to whomever they wish they can adopt children to. If they decide only to adopt children only to Catholic families or only to traditional Christian families then that is their right. They are a religious institution after all.
@redgoldbluephantom "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." Matt. 7:12 & Jesus said "If ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren ye have done it unto me." Matthew 25:40. Do you think gay people (people who are innately oriented toward their own gender) feel you are loving them and doing kind things to them by telling them that their love is evil or "sinful"? It's hypocritical and self-righteous to act that way. It drives these people away from Christ not toward Him.
@Starvalleybotany "Do unto others..." and "If ye have done it unto the least of these..." does not mean that Christians should tell people that it is OK to sin. Properly understood, it means that they should be taught the truth about their unrighteousness in a compassionate way. Not because they are hated, but because they want the gay people to suffer eternal punishment.
@redgoldbluephantom Your interpretation of what certain "sins" are and what are not are different than what this minister and many mainline Christians have. You might consider going to the Evangelicals Concerned Western Region Website and reading up on several scholars historical research on this topic. You would learn a lot but then at the same time the following quote is in order...
@Starvalleybotany Sin is an action/behavior that prevents a person from entering the Kingdom of God. For example, 1 Corinthians 6 lists the kinds of actions/behaviors that prevent people from entering the Kingdom.
@redgoldbluephantom Being drunk is considered something that keeps a person from entering into the Kingdom of God according to these passages. Erring on the side of grace is far better than erring on the side of legalism. Grace is what we are all saved by not through works. Paul even spoke about that. After all is said and done none of us is "worthy" to enter into the Kingdom but because of Christ's infinite sacrifice that has changed.
A Catholic would be a good person to discuss this with. For the most part, as I understand it, Christianity in general is the path that leads to salvation. What transgressions that the leaders of Christian Churches commit is not a reflection of the truth as it is revealed in the Bible (or even the Tradition of historic Christian Churches).
O'Connor is a Rastafarian who wants to use the abuse issue in the Catholic Church to push her own agenda. (Grammar corrected)
@redgoldbluephantom Also I think the Roman Catholic Church needs to pull the gigantic beam from its own eye before it tries to pull the mote out of societies eye. They have such immense hypocrisy when it comes to several issues that they seriously need to clean their own house before they tell others their houses are in need of cleaning.
Not everyone who is Catholic (especially the priests) is involved with sexual improprieties. The Catholic Church is made up of individuals, like any other organization - there are some who are good - there are some who are not. The hypocrisy of a small percentage does not void the efficacy of the Gospel message nor does it render useless all the good things that the Catholic Church has done over and still does all over the world.
@redgoldbluephantom It's always the argument "a small pecentage" that makes it look like these are isolated incidents. Sorry but I don't buy that for one second. Sure that does not negate the Gospel message of Jesus' but it certainly does negate the credibility of the leaders who purport to carry that message. It would be better that the Christian go out in to the woods or on a mountain alone (and or with their families) with their Bibles. They would likely learn far more in a few days...
Some people just look for opportunities to slip in some anti-Catholicism. What do rituals and ''wrote'' prayers have to do with the issue in the video?
@redgoldbluephantom I explained that Christians would gain more from their own personal reading of the Bible than going and listening to many months of preaching about it. This was a side issue that you and I were discussing. It has little to do with the video.
Anti-Catholic statements aside (''hollow rituals'' - as if they really don't mean anything), where does the Bible directly address or infer that Jesus would agree with what the priest in the video claims?
@redgoldbluephantom Jesus' words of tolerance and love. You might want to read and study the Sermon on the Mount and you also might wish to live it yourself because many of the posts I have seen you post here would show that you are a Christian in name only but your heart definitely does not reflect the Spirit of Christ as I have seen Him in the New Testament scriptures.
It is very strange people who claim to be non-judgmental and tolerant making judgments about people based upon politically correct notion that has no basis in the Gospel. The Sermon on the Mount was not about homosexuals and the redefinition of marriage to suit them. Invoking the ever popularly vague ''Spirit of Christ'' does not negate those values that are solidly founded in the Scriptures (e.g. the teachings in the New Testament that categorize homosexuality with adultery and murder).
I can't possibly be creating a god based on my opinions and desires, because as a red blooded male I would naturally really enjoy having sex with many different women. I would enjoy taking things that don't belong to me so I get them for free. If the authors of the Bible and the followers of the literal word wanted to make up a god to suit their own desires and ambitions, do you really think that 3/4 of the Bible would say what it says? I don't think so at all.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ 1.Matthew 4:19
And He said to them, "Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men."
(((NOT FISHERMEN BUT FISHERS OF MEN.)))
Mark 1:17
And Jesus said to them, "Follow Me, and I will make you become fishers of men."
FISHERS OF MEN MEANS MEN THAT ARE LOOKING FOR OTHER MEN.
IF IT'S OK WITH JESUS, THEN IT'S OK WITH ME.
THERE ARE ALMOST 7 BILLION PEOPLE ON THIS PLANET.
YOU BEING A STRAIGHT MALE SHOULD BE HAPPY THAT WE DON'T ALL WANT THE SAME FISH. YOUR CHANCE IS GREATER
iamluke123 11 months ago
Just by the way, the second commandment (it is pretty clear even if you doubt the authorship of scripture) is do not make idols for yourselves. This doesn't just mean lttle stone carvings that you worship instead of God (that is covered in the first commandment), it means do not create a god to fit your own desires and opinions. That's what you're doing here.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
And that argument is supposing that there is no element of choice in the homosexual lifestly. But even that argument is irrelevant and less important than the one just discussed. The main problem which I'm consistently seeing here is that you seem to be unwilling to accept the Bible and its message. Why not? Because it does not fit with current society or your own personal opinion? Who is Christ for you? Who do you think Christ is and what do you think He did for us?
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ You mentioned Christ. Well Christ never spoke one word against homosexuals nor homosexuality. Even God didn't speak one word against homosexuals nor homosexuality.
If it's so important and such a big crime, then why didn't God put homosexuality on his list of commandments?
The only forbidden sex in the commandments is between Married Men and Women.
Your following false prophets. You should try to follow God and Jesus, it would do you some good.
iamluke123 11 months ago
As such, when you talk about the example of murder (and actually all of the other ten commandments and laws of scripture apply to this very same reality) as being something you are not inherantly born with that you cannot change, Jesus clearly tells us that we have an in built nature that goes against God and breaks His laws all the time. Everything that is 'in-built' and not a 'choice' (as you state anyway) is not therefore acceptable.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
"You seem unable (or unwilling) to comprehend the obvious, that God may create men who murder, but He does not create them AS murderers." Jesus talks thoroughly about the human mindset, particularly in Matt 5:27. From a reading of Jesus' words we can clearly infer that sin is not only in the doing, but the thinking. If you hate, you have murdered in God's eyes (Matt 5:21-22). In this sense, considering everyone has committed sins of the spirit, murder etc. is not a 'choice' as you define it.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
I keep everyday holy. I don't just keep one day holy, and raise hell the rest of the week.
So what do you do? Just keep one day holy?
iamluke123 11 months ago
"If you love me, keep my commands". Love God by loving Jesus, show you love Jesus by keeping his commands that he, if you believe is He Triune, set in the whole Bible. Why do you think that one cannot love their neighbour unless they bend to their every desire? Does a mother show more love for her child by stopping him from playing with fire, or by letting him bun his hands? Similarly with our Christian brothers. We can love AND attend to the need for salvation. They are not mutually exclusive.
GoldenbanjoDJ 1 year ago
I suppose Jesus would approve of abortion as well?
GoldenbanjoDJ 1 year ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ, if you are not rational or educated enough to see the difference between a loving relationship between two consenting adults, and...abortion, then I'm afraid you cannot coherently comment on this subject. Sorry.
GodCreatesGays2 11 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
I am rational enough to know that Jesus would not approve of either based on what was written in the Bible and what Jesus said of things written in the Bible. You go ahead and feel free to cherry pick bits and bobs but know this; Jesus Himself said that He had not come to change any of the law. God is unchanging. If you think He is, your God is certainly not the triune God of Father Son and Holy Spirit.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
Furthermore, your very name is erroneous. God creates every single person on the planet. That includes adulterers, liars and murderers. Just because He creates people with a free will to disobey Him, does not justify these actions. What if my name was GodCreatesMurderers? That is true, yet it does not justify it. U r blaming God for your sin. How can you believe in the Gospel of Salvation when u deny that there is anything wrong with you?! And you talk to me about being rational!
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
Finally, I am rational and educated enough to know that ANY sin is enough to keep you from God. If you think that Gay marriage is less worse than abortion, fair enough, but God doesn't work by your standards. He doesn't equate less worse with 'right', He still sees 'SIN' at the end of the day. God created the law and He maintains it. Abortion is murder. God has a law for that. God also has a law for homosexuality. In God's eyes, both are wrong and both keep us from Him. Sorry!
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GBDJ, well, your personal opinion proves...what your personal opinion is. Nothing more, nothing less. There's no proof anywhere that JESUS would single out gay people, from among all the children whom God creates, to condemn. Your wishful thinking doesn't mean you can actually speak for Him, or fill in the blanks to what isn't there. When the human beings who write or interpret the Bible contradict God's will, as they do here (being gay is not a "sin"), then it's the men who are wrong, not God.
GodCreatesGays2 11 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
That is interesting. I haven't used personal opinion anywhere in my argument. I'm stating truth found in the Bible, the very Bible which both condemns us and saves us. Jesus doesn't hate the woman caught in adultery, correct, but he tells her to 'sin no more'. This is exactly the same as the gay issue, and in fact ANY issue with mankind. But we have to realise we are sinning and have gone our own way before we can accept the need to be saved. I'm not filling in blanks...
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ, it's your personal opinion that anything in the Bible represents any truth at all. With all its translations, editing, interpretations and misinterpretations throughout the years, thinking of the Bible as anything other than an interesting book of fables and myths is your right, but it's no actual concrete proof of anything.
GodCreatesGays2 11 months ago
..... Jesus states very clearly in Matt 5:17 that He did not come to abolish the law or the prophets. As the unchanging God incarnate, he doesn't change his mind from OT to NT. God is unchanging. Your god changes with time, from the OT and declaring that men who sleep with men are abominations (Bible's words, not mine) to the NT god who doesn't care. Wrong is wrong throughout History; moral absolutism is KEY to the Bible. God and His precepts don't change. Jesus doesn't single out gay people...
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
... but he doesn't single out paedofiles either. Does that make it right? On the contrary, with Jesus declaring that He has not come to abolish the law, it therefore stands that the law presented in the OT still stands. He doesn't have to re-go over every single law as the Jewish people would have known it already. This is why the OT and the NT flow so completely into each other.
So are you a Christian, or just a troll with that name? Where do you get your truth from, if not from the Bible?
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
I would also suggest that it is the modern interpretation that homosexuality is not a 'sin' that is most likely to be a misinterpretation. If you hold to the 'translations, editing, interpretations and misinterpretations' craic then you will logically recognise that the Bible in its earliest form was the most correct version. Therefore, at earlier periods in History, the Bible is more likely to be correct. The argument that Homosexuality is not sin is a VERY recent concept.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ, of course, there were not even words in the original text to mean "homosexual", so what's really a misinterpretation and mistake (well, one of many, really) on the part of the Bible authors is that being gay ever WAS a sin. Such an idea is only wishful thinking on the part of those who wish to condemn minorities, and use their convenient interpretation of "god" as an excuse.
GodCreatesGays2 11 months ago
The fact that the Bible states that a man who lies with another man is an abomination speaks volumes regarding God's stance on homosexuality. The original writers do not exactly require a word for 'homosexual' to relay the obvious connotations here.Man that lies with man = homosexual. It's wishful thinking to suggest that the lack of a specific word renders the whole discussion foundationless.
Again back to the fall reality; God creates people who murder. ur answer to that? incompetence? faulty?
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
I've come back to this because something has occured to me: Your whole ethos is completely contradictory to the Gospel message and the role of Jesus as saviour. Why do we need a saviour if people like you are going to run around saying 'God created us like this, we are acceptable'? God created every single one of us, and every single one of us has fallen short. Is that God's fault. Can God, as a just judge, take us for who we REALLY are? No he can't!
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
What we are seeing now and what you have been arguing from the very MOMENT you created your Youtube name is going far beyond the homosexuality debate into a discussion regarding the need for a saviour. Jesus said I am the way the truth and the life, as well as many other well known phrases that link Him and only Him to God and the way to eternal life. Your 'I was made this way' theory suggests you think you are acceptable before God and thus you go against Jesus and His teachings
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
GBDJ proclaims, "Your 'I was made this way' theory suggests you think you are acceptable before God and thus you go against Jesus and His teachings"
Everyone is acceptable before God, if they follow His will and direction for their lives, and remain true to themselves and the way he made them, whether this be str8 or gay. Going against YOUR personal opinion and beliefs are not on a par with "going against Jesus". See, most people don't accept that you & He are on the same level.
GodCreatesGays2 11 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
No one at all is acceptable before God. "For all have fallen short". The whole Gospel message is about how we cannot be acceptable before God and therefore need someone else (Jesus) to save us. You aren't going against my opinion, you are going against what is written in the Bible, so your beef is with God not me! Whilst I ground my beliefs in scripture, you are making it up as you go along, and have nothing to base your ideology or world view on....
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
...As a result of this egocentric creation of a mindset that is based nowhere on scripture, it is not I who is more likely to be wrong, it is you! At least my mindset actually comes from somewhere. If we remain true to ourselves as you suggests makes us 'acceptable' before God (ridiculous statement) then by God's perfect justice we will be damned on judgement day. Mankind is inherantly sinful. Remanining true to our natural way is to maintain sin, something which God cannot have near Him.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
"It only "speaks volumes" about what the book's authors & apologists believe, or want to believe."
That is hilarious! You are the incarnation of your own thesis! You make it up to suit your own mindset because if you look at the actual text and base your opinion on anything tangible at all you are shown to be clearly wrong.
Leviticus 20:18. Read it. Analyse the literature. Any sort of reading will indicate that it says "as one lies with a woman", not "how you already lie with a woman"...
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
... (I apologise, lev 20:13) There reference is obviously to the act of sex, not "as they already do with their wives". There is absolutely no specific reference to the men being heterosexual or homosexual, but it is clear that sex with men is not a heterosexual act. Here is the classic case of people trying to find something where nothing is written, so who is really trying to justify their own personal opinion, me or you?
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
GBoDJ claims, "No one at all is acceptable before God."
The men who wrote the Bible, to control the masses, want you to believe that. But living a good life, & accepting the way God creates you (rather than caving in to irrational, man-made bigotry) is a good way to garner His favor. As a loving Father, He wants us to do good, be happy, & be ourselves.
"you are going against what is written in the Bible"
But I AM accepting & promoting God's will, so the Bible remains irrelevant in comparison.
GodCreatesGays2 11 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2 How do you know God's will? Are you a prophet?
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Did you ever read the bible and find out who is in heaven? Abraham in the distance and Lazarus in his lap
Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side
Abraham far away and Lazarus in his bosom
What would you say if you would go somewhere and see a man in another man's lap? Or in his bosom?
This is what is written in the bible of two men in heaven being in the bosom, or on the lap of the other.
iamluke123 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ wants to know, "Why do we need a saviour if people like you are going to run around saying 'God created us like this, we are acceptable'?"
Maybe you are not as acceptable, and still need to be saved.
(You asked.)
GodCreatesGays2 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ contends, "The fact that the Bible states that a man who lies with another man is an abomination speaks volumes regarding God's stance on homosexuality"
No. It only "speaks volumes" about what the book's authors & apologists believe, or want to believe. God, Himself, makes His stance on homosexuality completely clear by continuing to create, love, & keep His gay children right here on His planet, as part of His divine plan for mankind. HE wants them here, just the way they are.
GodCreatesGays2 11 months ago
GBDJ writes, "The original writers do not exactly require a word for 'homosexual' to relay the obvious connotations here."
Of course, even to the most learned Biblical scholars, there is no one, single interpretation. Many believe that the "anti-gay" passages actually refer to hetero men being forbidden to lie with other men, as they already do with their wives. In any case, the Bible was written by men, and any of their musings take a back seat to God's choice to create gays & keep them here.
GodCreatesGays2 11 months ago
GBDJ demands, "God creates people who murder. ur answer to that?"
You seem unable (or unwilling) to comprehend the obvious, that God may create men who murder, but He does not create them AS murderers. They choose such behavior, themselves. And chosen behavior has no correlation whatsoever to innate, unchangeable characteristics like skin or eye color, sexual orientation, being left-handed, etc. The Lord creates some men as heterosexuals; their murdering their wives is their own doing.
GodCreatesGays2 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ, being gay is not a "sin", unless you think God is an incompetent boob with a faulty design system, Who continues creates and keeps an entire community of His children here on earth without knowing He's made them wrong, LOL. I take God's competence for granted, and trust in His will, judgment, and wisdom in populating His earth with diversity, including His gay children. I believe that God's will triumphs over man's prejudices and ignorance any day. But that's just me.
GodCreatesGays2 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GodCreatesGays2
“”being gay is not a "sin", unless you think God is an incompetent boob with a faulty design system, Who continues creates and keeps an entire community “”
I guess that simply makes pedophilia simply another expression of God's diversity then correct? That makes it morally sound if consent is involved. The mentally and physically handicapped are also examples of God's loving diversity.
Samc023 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This man is so wrong. He really has no clue. You can still love your neighbor just because you don't agree with what he is doing. Hate sin and love the sinner. This preacher is really talking out of his you know what. Sorry to say. Wow. He takes the word of God and mashes it all up to fit an agenda.
tomcamp6023 1 year ago
I think this priest is right. Let me add also that God never put homosexuality on his list of commandments of things not to do. Jesus also never spoke one word against homosexuals nor homosexualiy.
iamluke123 1 year ago
This guy is evil like skeletor! These are the type of people who should be burned at a stake with their books burning at their feet. He is twisting up what the Bible says. I would have no problem assaulting this guy just because He is misrepresenting my God.
Icanseeu123able 1 year ago
@Icanseeu123able God never put homosexuality on his list of commandments of things not to do. Jesus also never spoke against homosexuals. I think your misinterpreting the true God.
iamluke123 1 year ago
This guy is Gay and not a Christian!. He is what you call a false teacher "FALSE TEACHER"
tomcamp6023 1 year ago
@tomcamp6023
he should be honoured for his big words..
I would rather see him as the new pope!
Ief87 1 year ago
@Ief87 . He would then have too move. Great idea. Lets do it.
tomcamp6023 1 year ago
@tomcamp6023 Just because he is fighting for gay rights, doesn't mean he is gay.
Jesus never spoke against homosexuals nor homosexuality. I think this priest is speaking the truth.
iamluke123 1 year ago
@iamluke123 . Luke obviously you have never read the bible because homosexuality is denounced throughout the bibe. This man is not teaching what the bible say's he is teacher what he think. Its his opinion not Gods. Nick we all struggle with thing that are sinful , Lust and homosexuality and adultry . We need to come to the Lord and ask him for help with those struggle and really want to change and it will happen. the desire will diminish and God will give you that strength. Obey God.
tomcamp6023 1 year ago
@tomcamp6023 I do obey God! The day I see a bible that has homosexuality on the list of commandments of things not to do, and I believe then I will change my ways. Until now I have not seen any such bible.
Also the day I see a bible that has Jesus speaking agianst homosexuality or homosexuals I will change my ways also.
I thought the bible was about God and Jesus, not about all other Tom, Dick, and Harry out there.
I only follow God and Jesus, I don't follow false prophets!
iamluke123 1 year ago
@iamluke123 . Leviticus 20:13 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a women both them have done what is detestabe. leviticus 18.22 Do not lie with a man as one lies with a women that is destestable.Corinthians 6:9-10 Do not be deceived neither the sexually inmmoral nor the idolaters nor the adulters nor the male prostitues nor Homosexual offenders will inherit the kingdom of God. THE GOOD KNEWS. CORINTHIANS 6:11 MENTIONS THAT YOU CAN INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD . TURN FROM YOU SINFUL WAYS.
tomcamp6023 1 year ago
@tomcamp6023 . Corinthians 6:11 You were washed you were sanctified you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the spirit of our God . .
Once you make the decsion to change you can turn to God for strength. God has given us free will and we can choose or not choose to do what is right. Choose what is right and inherit the kindom of God. If you ask God to come into your life he will. Ask with all your heart and really want to change. God bless.
tomcamp6023 1 year ago
@tomcamp6023 You spoke of God. Well God never put homosexualtiy on his list of commandments.
You also spoke of the Lord Jesus Christ, well the Lord Jesus Christ never spoke one word against homosexuals nor homosexuality.
Your following false prophets, turn back and follow God and Jesus and stop attacking homosexuals, because God and Jesus never attacked homosexuals nor homosexuality.
iamluke123 1 year ago
@tomcamp6023 Excuse me but is Leviticus another name for God or Jesus?
Excuse me again, is Corinthians also another name for God or Jesus?
Like I said I follow God and Jesus, you can take your Leviticus and Corinthians and shove it.
Leviticus says that EVERYONE not just homosexuals but EVERYONE shall be put to death for having SEX.
PLEASE TURN AWAY FROM YOUR OWN SINFUL WAYS.
iamluke123 1 year ago
@iamluke123 . I have turned from my sin. Are you going to do the same. You can have sex once you are married.
tomcamp6023 1 year ago
@tomcamp6023 lol, I would never put myself in that kind of trap!
Please tell me what my sin is, because homosexuality isn't on God's list!
Yes you Tom has homosexuality on your list of sins, but last time I checked, you Tom ain't God.
iamluke123 1 year ago
@iamluke123 not keeping the sabbath is your sin :D
Gergoth 11 months ago
@tomcamp6023 You should read the bible. If you believe that God destroyed the city of Sodom. Then you must know that he did so only after Lot called homosexuality a wicked thing.
Lot the one that forbid homosexuals the pleasure of homosexual sex was the one that was attacked in the bible. His home was burned to the ground. He has no home. His wife was turned into a pillar of salt (there goes his sex life, right out the door)
Lot said gays can't have sex, then God made sure Lot didn't either.
iamluke123 11 months ago
@iamluke123
So if Lot was the one in the wrong, as opposed to the people in the city committing the sin that God apparently doesn't mind, why is it that God decided to destroy sodom and its people whilst specifically telling Lot to get out and therefore saving Him? God killed the wicked and saved the righteous. Lot was righteous, not wrong!
Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt because she looked back at the city, disobeying God. Nothing to do with Lot's statement. LOL! Read it again.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Your the one that needs to read the bible again chum!
The two angels didn't even want to go in Lot's house, they wanted to go down and spend the night with the homosexuals in the town square.
Your doing the same thing that Lot did, your putting your nose in other men's shorts.
Look if your Gay then you have the right to put your nose in other men's shorts, but if your straight you have no business there.
Do I make myself clear?
iamluke123 11 months ago
@iamluke123
lol i expected a hostile response. people who distort the bible in order to follow their own worldly feelings usually do when corrected.
did God put paedophilia in the ten commandments? your logic is erroneous. anyway, God makes it clear than man lying with man like they would with a woman is an abomination. why do you have to have homosexual desires to be on another man's lap or bosom? there is no sexuality in heaven. there is no need to reproduce- another stupid point from you
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
i'm following the Bible, God's unchanging word, no false prophets. you're making an idol by folliwing a god other than the Bible God. God Himself is unchanging, so if you believe that Jesus is God and you believe Him when he says He has not come to do away with the law, you will do well to realise this includes the moral law present in Leviticus. God STILL sees man lying with man as an abomination.
Fishers of men - you really think that has homosexual connotations?!?!?!?!?!
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
You're distorting God's word, and it seems like you don't have a problem with doing it. I can argue with people such as Godcreatedgays who has not read the Bible nor accepts its divine origin, but when there is someone who hs read it and draws such erroneous conclusions, I'm only going to argue so much. I'll have no part with someone who mangles the Bible to suit his own desires. Judgement will be even worse for people who do that.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Your trying to sell your GoldenFiddle to the wrong person. Your the one who's distorting God's words.
Give me the words of God!
Give me the words of Jesus!
Don't give me your BS!
Show me where God said anything against homosexuals.
Show me where Jesus said anything against homosexuals.
Homosexuality is not on God's commandments of things not to do. It didn't even make the list.
iamluke123 11 months ago
@iamluke123
You're trying to sell your secularist BS to the wrong person.
Show me where God said anything against paedofiles?
Show me where Jesus says anything against paedofiles?
You know FINE WELL where God calls out against Homosexuals. Of course I wasn't calling God stupid. I called you stupid. "Another STUPID point from YOU" if you could actually read. That's the whole poiunt. You make it up as you go along. You're manufacturing your own idol, of something that approves of what you do.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
And you seem to have some massive trouble in distinguishing between moral law and ritual law. Jesus' death puts up a filter which allows ritual law to be tossed away. If anyone is perfect, he can follow such ritual law perfectly and go to heaven without salvation from Jesus, so they STILL stand in that sense, but seeing as NO-ONE is perfect, ritual law can be superceded by Christ's deeds for the non-perfect in the world.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
But you're right, Jesus doesn't say anything about homosexuality. That is because that law is not changed by Him. He only talks of laws that are hanged by His coming ie. 'work' on the sabbath, "the sabbath is made for man, not man for the sabbath" when the disciples were 'working' by picking corn to eat. So too, the woman caught in adultery, "go now and sin no more" as opposed to 'stone her'. He gracefully forgives us gives us the chance to turn from the sinful lives that condemn us before Him..
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
... but in turn, he wants us to turn from our sins, like he wants the woman to turn from her adultery. He gives us that chance through Him. So too lev talks of shellfish, but later in the NT Peter has a dream in which God tells him that all foods are clean. Are you seeing a pattern? Any law that is superceded by Jesus' coming is specifically mentioned and tackled. Homosexuality is not mentioned by Jesus. Therefore, the OT law is NOT being superceded.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ I asked for the quotes from the bible. Not your own twisted interpretations.
When you preach against homosexuals your following false prophets. Your following every Tom, Dick, and Harry.
You should try following God and Jesus, after all they are the main characters in the bible.
iamluke123 11 months ago
@iamluke123
And I asked for a quote from where God or Jesus condemn paedofilia, because by your logic neglect of instruction means that it is allowed.
John 8:10 - "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more." Jesus as forgiving and refusing to stone the woman, yet instructing us to turn from our sinful ways. Jesus therefore supercedes this law.
Mark 7:19 - "Thus he declared all foods clean" - again superceding OT law
Now can you tell me where Jesus supercedes Leviticus 20:13?
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
But you will not be able to tell me where Jesus supercedes the law concerning homosexuality, because as you say, he does not mention it. The only times Jesus talks of the law is when he either uses it or supercedes it. Seeing as he never supercedes the homosexual practice, only someone with an agenda could suggest that Jesus views it as being acceptable. Man and woman relationships are also a creation ordinance, which is a BIG problem for gay theists to counter.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
All of scripture is God breathed (2 Timothy 3:16) and so all is useful for instruction. Following the Bible and its teachings is to directly follow God as they are His manifestations. What do you think the Bible is? You seem to be under the impression that there is only the 4 synoptic gospels that bear any relevance
Why is preaching against homosexuals following every Tom Dick and Harry? Maybe because everyone else has it right and you are interpreting the Bible to suit yourself?
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
And give me a reference to say that all sex is forbidden please.
It is hilarious the extent to which people will try to create a god that accepts their homosexuality. There is NOTHING to suggest it is acceptable anywhere in the Bible. That Matthew fishers of men interpretation of yours will have me laughing for weeks LOL! Fishers of men = gay disciples. even if that was the case, they would be BECOMING gay, so homosexuality is a lifestyle choice??? now you are making sense! LOL!
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
You still haven't answered my original question about why Lot, who called homosexuality wicked, was saved whilst all the homosexuals were judged and killed by God at Sodom... That would be a bit of a mix up by God... "whoops I meant to tell all the homosexuals to leave and keep Lot in the city instead....error!" Seeing as God is just and God doesn't make errors, your interpretation is, again, bollocks...
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
Finally, the erroneous point about Adam, Even, Noah and his sons and their link to Leviticus: Adam and Eve (at least you accept their presence as literal figures in the Bible (notice how they are made male and female as well) ) and Noah came before the detailed law of Leviticus... If God intended the law regarding sex between relatives to be binding to Adam and Eve, he would have given them that law when he gave them their other law not to eat from the tree.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
Also realise the fact that if God did place leviticus' instructions at the time of Adam and Eve, they would not be able to reproduce. God created one man and one woman and all mankind stemmed from there. Mankind would be doomed from the start with your logic. As well as this, biologically, the risk genetic mutation and resulting deformations and genetically determined illness is increasingly intense the further along the generational line you get.......
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
......due to this fact, incest between Adam's sons and daughters and Noah's sons and daughters etc etc. would have resulted in insignificant risk of genetic problems in their children in comparison to what the risk factor is today, or even in the times of leviticus. The laws, believe it or not, are there to help mankind. by the time leviticus was written, God clearly determined that it was time to introduce an incest rule because the genetic risk was too great. Even so, there is still.......
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
..... the possibility that Noah's sons (in Genesis, so quite a while before Levicitus) would have had babies that were genetically damaged. We live in a fallen world. God had just adminstered justice on the earth because of the sin, and so there were only a few people left. Mark 10:2-12 "For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment" shows clearly how God tries to make the best out of a bad situation, even though the 'best' may still be undesirable. IT all goes back to original sin.
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
Therefore, not only was there no law to condemn Adam and Eve's sons and Noah's sons, but, except from creating a new creation (which God would not do), the only option was for incest, the least worst option for a bad situation (the worst being the death of humanity). Even still, biology shows us that the dangers of incest increase exponentially as time goes by, so they may not even have needed the law of leviticus, which is written for the good of mankind. Sorry this has been long, it's complex
GoldenbanjoDJ 11 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Your so full of BS!
You know nothing of God and Jesus.
Your taking your hate and trying to spread it to others. We're not buying it.
Look your trying to make us follow LEVITICUS. According to Leviticus EVERYONE should be put to death.
I'm following God and Jesus, you can take your Leviticus and shove it. I'm not about to follow Leviticus and put everyone to death.
iamluke123 11 months ago
@iamluke123
That's all you can say - "You're so full of BS" and "You know nothing of God and Jesus". It is I who have been providing Biblical Truth, and I'm positive that God has been watching this conversation and seen that. The only quotes you provide are erroneous interpretations such as Fishers of men (LOL - I laugh every time I think about it) and a made-up version of Lot's story. You cannot and have not answered ANY of my questions, but I hav answered ALL of urs and done so with the Bible
GoldenbanjoDJ 10 months ago
I have taken the time to write plenty of posts not because I want to spread hate (look at who the first one to use an ad hominem in this discussion was - it was YOU) but because the Bible teaches that scripture is useful for correcting, and that we should be correcting our brothers with love. Paul corrected many churches in his epistles because they had strayed from God's word. It's the duty of Christians to make sure others are staying true. You are preaching a false religion.........
GoldenbanjoDJ 10 months ago
...... and Christians SHOULD come in and stop the destruction of God's word, because it is the people who make up God's word as they go along that are more dangerous to Christianity than atheism and Islam combined, because they such the very lifeblood out of Christ. You don't even sound like you know the bible, so how can you know God and Jesus? The truth hurts, and I'm not sorry to be pointing it out to you. I am sorry that you feel I am hating though. The internet is difficult to convey tone
GoldenbanjoDJ 10 months ago
YES YOU'RE RIGHT!!! According to Levicitus we ALL deserve death!!!!! THIS IS ABSOLUTELY CENTRAL TO THE GOSPEL MESSAGE!!! Leviticus, Deuteronomy, the Ten Commandments AND Jesus' own words in Matt 5:27-28 revolve around the message of the law. The law condemns us and only Jesus saves us. If we live by the law, we are doomed and if we live by Jesus' saving grace and we love Him, John 14:15 states that we would obey his commands. Jesus told toe woman to 'sin no more'.......
GoldenbanjoDJ 10 months ago
...... and He does so because he recognises that the OT law on adultery still stands, and that disobeying the law is sin. Disobeying Leviticus is sin! We are ALL guilty of it and Christians who understand this are saved. The law of leviticus is NOT about putting people to death now that Jesus has come to save. Why are you incapable of comprehending SIMPLE Bible Theology?! We follow Leviticus now not to put people to death, but to KEEP GOD/JESUS' COMMANDS, because we love Jesus!
GoldenbanjoDJ 10 months ago
I have some news for you. I've already quoted 2 Timothy 3:16, that ALL scripture is God breathed. I will spell it out for you: Genesis, Exodus, LEVITICUS, numbers, deuteronomy, joshua, judges, ruth, samuel 1+2, kings 1+2, Chronicles 1+2, ezra, nehamiah, esther, job, psalms, proverbs, ecclesiastes, song of solomon, isaiah, jerimiah, lamentations, ezekiel, daniel, hosea, joel, amos, obadiah, jonah, micah, nahum, habakkuk, zephaniah, haggai, zecheriah and malachi IS ALL GOD'S WORD. I follow God
GoldenbanjoDJ 10 months ago
The prologue of John's Gospel teaches of the word (logos in Greek). It teaches that the word was there in the beginning and that the word created everything. Clearly the logos is God (I won't go into the reasons John used 'logos' in this discussion, it might be too difficult for you). Then the prologue teaches that the word became incarnate (that means became flesh). So the word is also Jesus (doctrine of the Trinity). Therefore, Jesus AND God both created the world and both made the law.
GoldenbanjoDJ 10 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ
Because God and Jesus as one both made the law, by following the law I AM following God and Jesus. But I'm thankful that the law does not save me, because no-one measures up to it. I am saved through Jesus and I love Him so much that I want to obey what he says. The two logically go together. You're like a person who says that you are someone's friend, and them bitches about them behind their back, or fails to display any friendly characteristics towards your 'friend'.
GoldenbanjoDJ 10 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Genesis 1:26 (New International Version, ©2011) 26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness
(LET US MAKE MANKIND) (SAME KIND MAN LUKE T) all the letters fit.
IN OUR LIKENESS (SON RISE IN LUKE) all the letters fit.
iamluke123 10 months ago
@iamluke123
all I have to say is 'wow'
GoldenbanjoDJ 10 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ They don't call me mental for nothing. lol But it's the truth.
iamluke123 10 months ago
@iamluke123
mate honestly i don't want any more bad feeling between us. i've said all that i have to say. you can take it on board if you like, or you can discard it. it's your choice
GoldenbanjoDJ 10 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Peace! It was fun talking with you.
TALKING (LT A KING)
iamluke123 10 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Throughout history, everyone who said they were God was called mental. They had a sticker placed on them.
One day God will come and say he is God, and they will call him mental also. Until they will understand then they will say AMEN.
AMEN LT (MENTAL)
iamluke123 10 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Genesis 1:26 (New Living Translation) 26 Then God said, “Let us make human beings[a] in our image, to be like us.
TO BE LIKE US (LUKE IS TO BE)
Luke is to be, to be like us.
iamluke123 10 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ I am the first and the last.
I AM THE ALPHA (HIM A PA HE A LT) This is if you believe the chicken came before the egg.
I AM THE ALPHA (HI PA HE LT A MA) This is if you believe the egg came before the chicken.
The Alpha which is God is both MA MA and PA PA.
So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
The image of God is both male and female. (OR A GAY MAN) lol
iamluke123 10 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Oh by the way, my Mother's name is Elizabeth. Elizabeth was the one who was carrying the holy spirit.
Mary Visits Elizabeth 39 At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40 where she entered Zechariah’s home and greeted Elizabeth. 41 When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.
Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.
iamluke123 10 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ There is no wheres in the bible that says the child Mary had was filled with the holy spirit.
How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?” 35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you
COME ON YOU, AND OVERSHADOW YOU, does not mean that it was in Mary.
The Holy Spirit was in Elizabeth. My Mother's name.
By the way if you want to read this story, it's in the book of LUKE.
iamluke123 10 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Of course God's been watching this conversation! I am God! I am Luke Thibodeau! I am the Almighty. My initials are LT.
aLmighTy.
him gay LT (aLmighTy)
I am the first and the last. (I'm GAY)
Before me there was no God and there will be none besides me.
I'm the image of God.
IMAGE (ME GAY) I changed the I back into a Y.
You never even knew that God's name is LUKE.
iamluke123 10 months ago
@GoldenbanjoDJ Supid? Your calling God stupid?
You say God does not change and that you must follow the laws of Leviticus.
I'm sure you did somekind of work last Sunday. Should your neighbors pick up stones and stone you to death as the laws of Leviticus states?
If you read Leviticus it says that ALL SEX is forbidden. Adam and Eve would of been put to death as it is written in the book of Leviticus.
Noah and his family would of been stoned to death for having sex with relatives.
iamluke123 11 months ago
said that loving your neighbor as yourself, as Jesus told us to do, means you need to vote No on Proposition 8. This is terrible logic
freakman707 1 year ago
This priest is right on about what the real Christian message should be and should have been for Prop 8 in California.
Rockymtntruth 1 year ago
Paul would disagree with that.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom Show me from the original Greek manuscripts that Paul would disagree with that. More importantly Paul was a man. He was NOT God. He had his own opinions just like you have your own opinions. Opinion is not necessarily reality.
Rockymtntruth 1 year ago
Paul's letters are part of the cannon of the New Testament. People who through faith accept it as the word of God are Christians. Those who believe otherwise are not. The priest in the video is proclaiming something that is foreign and contrary to that faith - as found through the words of Paul as well as the testimony of the Old Testament. That is the problem.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom I see you now have a litmus test for people who are Christians or not. Typical of the Pharisaical brand of Christians like you.
Rockymtntruth 1 year ago
There is a "litmus" test for Christianity, it is usually referred to the tenants of the Christian faith. Among those tenants that makes a person an adherent of the Christian religion are the belief in the divinity of Christ, the acceptance of all the canonical books of the New Testament and the belief that the Bible is the inspired Word of God.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom The belief that the entire Bible is the inspired word of God is not a litmus test to be a Christian. Maybe in your Church that is the case but not in all Christian Churches.
Rockymtntruth 1 year ago
Just because a group calls itself Christian does not automatically make itself Christian in the same way that just because a person calls his/her relationship with another person a ''marriage'' does not automatically make it so.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom So I take it that by your litmus test the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not Christian? Is that what you believe?
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
The common orthodoxy held by Protestants and the historic Christian Churches are their ''litmus'' test that they use to define themselves as Christians. This is why the adherents to those denominations do not consider groups like the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses to be Christian. I agree with them.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom I don't agree with them. I think that as the Latter-day Saints have taught from early on that there is much more to the Gospel (the universe and the message of infinite truth) than has been understood heretofore. It was the genius of Mormonism that taught that we are not the only planet that God has created. That there are infinite number of worlds without number. Also that God's process of teaching is infinite and not confined to one book but numberless revelations.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
The different ideas would be a good focus of discussion on a related comment page.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom I also don't agree with the limitations that Protestantism and Catholicism place on humanity. Even Mormonism (as a modern religion) has struggles with that. It has come up against the same kinds of problems that the early Christian Church faced in its process of growth. It is a very very fascinating, dynamic faith that is on its way to become the next major world faith. There are too many questions that traditional Christianity just does not answer.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom I believe traditional Christianity though important has lost many principles because of its choice to embrace war & love of hierarchy (especially in the Roman Catholic church) over love of God. Orthodoxy is what the leadership has often chosen over the love of God. Sinead O'Connor was right on about the Catholic Church holding the Holy Spirit hostage with regard to the lies they have held up to protect their image when they have committed horrific crimes against humanity.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
Comment removed
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom I have discussed this with Roman Catholics and former Catholics. It is a travesty and I find it appalling that you would say that about Ms. O'Connor. Very appalling to blame the victim (she was victimized herself) as opposed to the victimizers. Sure the majority of Catholics (and likely most Catholic leaders) do not condone the abuse; however when the top leaders continue to cover it up to make the Church look like it's spotless, they are guilty of the greater sin.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
Ms. O'Connor was never blamed for anything except pushing her own agenda (discredit traditional Christianity) and I didn't comment on this page about the abuse because the subject of abuse is not the topic of the video (the ''Catholic things'' are being brought up as peripheral, but not primary issues). My opinion about the abusers is very clear on other pages.
O'Connor being a victim of abuse does not make her actions and statements immune from reasonable criticism.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom So now when someone speaks out against Papal abuse or against the evil's that too many Catholic clergy are involved with they are pushing their own agenda. I see how it works.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
Ms. O'Connor's agenda is quite clear, she has stated it several times and through staged productions that she participated in (e.g. depicting Mary in a dishonorable way). Let us not forget that she isn't the only person speaking about the abuses. Some of them have more merit than others.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom YOu mean she has depicted Mary in a similar way as Madonna did? I just don't get that kind of stuff. It's not uncommon in the rock and roll music world.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
Depicting Mary as a woman who spouts off obscenities is much in line with Ms. O'Connor's anti-religious ideas. Whether it is common or not, the motivation for doing such things is always questionable.
The priest in the video, on the other hand, might be motivated out of a misguided sense of compassion, but he is making unwarranted assumptions about Jesus and the people who voted for Proposition 8.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom Well I don't know enough about Sinead's motivation or of any of the incidents you are describing to make any kind of comment on it. As for the priest in the video there are many different mainline Christian Churches who have much the same approach as this priest does on the issue of prop 8. I don't assume that everyone who voted for prop 8 did so for exactly the same reasons. There has been negative things said and done on both sides. It has been a very polarizing issue.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
The priest is making unwarranted assumptions as are those churches that neglect the Biblical and historical teachings on the subject.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom That's your own personal opinion. There are religions who think that your faith is apostate and fallen from the original teachings of Christ and that the Bible has errors in it. They believe that this warranted a restoration of priesthood authority and that God sent new prophets and apostles to restore what was lost. Did it ever occur to you that what you have believed all of these years might be flawed?
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom The question must be asked that if marriage equality for same gender couples does help those relationships to become much more grounded then will those stronger & more stable relationships have a positive or a negative effect on society as a whole? Does marriage equality reduce promiscuity? Does marriage equality also help make LGBT people take these commitments more seriously? Does marriage equality also help LGBT be more integrated into the whole of society?
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
Using the misnomer ''marriage equality'' detracts from the heart of the issue. Proposition 8 gets to the important question of whether the composition of a committed relationship is essential to the definition of marriage. From a religious perspective (the subject of this video), the question should be, ''What would Jesus think about Proposition 8?'' Not, ''what do people assume would be the societal benefit of changing the definition of marriage?''
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom We don't really know what Jesus would have said about proposition 8 because all we have are the words He said about other issues and there was nothing discussed about gay people let alone gay marriage. He seemed to look at celibacy as the gold standard to live by. Nobody really knows exactly what He would have said about the prop 8 issue. He may have said that civil marriage is not much of an institution at all; that marriage through the Church is what really counts.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
@Starvalleybotany If a person goes by the words of Jesus found in the Gospel, there is only one conclusion (especially in reference to Matthew 16).
If religious marriage is all that counts, the priest in the video wouldn't have an issue with Proposition 8 passing.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom Perhaps but of course there are other faith's (including non-Christian non-Jewish faith's) who do not believe in the Bible and reject it as a myth. These folks should have the opportunity for a civil equal marriage recognized by the government.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom Also I think the priest here is speaking more about letting people have their free agency and not trying to control others. Also there are hundreds of thousands of gay couples who are raising children (most of those kids grow up to be heterosexual adults by the way) and the benefits of civil marriage are a blessing to all involved and there are tremendous benefits for the kids as well as the couples.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
@Starvalleybotany The priest is speaking about his own opinion. By making unwarranted assumptions about Jesus and preaching such as if it were Jesus' ''position'' borders on blasphemy.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom It's Ironic that my own Church put so much time & money into the support of prop 8. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is deeply committed to marriage & family to the point that marriage & family are one of the pillars of the faith. The Irony is that the Church puts its greatest value in the concept of marriage for time & all eternity that is sealed in the Holy Temple or "House of the Lord" & that will likely never be something same sex couples will experience.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
@Starvalleybotany A man/woman couple is not the same as man/man couple. Even in a secular sense, the difference is significant. The Mormons have this understanding and most of the adults in California concurred.
In a religious sense, what the priest is preaching has no support from the Bible.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom Yes the Mormons believe that; however, they (just as many Evangelicals, many Catholics, etc.) have every right to exercise their rights within the sphere of their religious influence. Where that influence ends is within the area of civil rights. These faiths are flourishing in states like Iowa, Connecticut and Massachusetts who support civil same sex marriage rights.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
@Starvalleybotany Actually, in those states the decision to change the definition did not come through a vote, it was mandated by a court or an overreaching government. Actually in places such as Boston and Washington D.C. Christian institutions were adversely affected by the change. For example, Catholic adoption agencies were forced to shut down due to the government demanding they adopt to gay couples - even though there were alternatives for gay people.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom The government should not demand that a religious institution adopt to certain couples. I for one would not seek out a religious organization that is opposed to my innate being to adopt children through. That would be absurd. So in that area I think that a religious institution should be exempt partly because there are so many different adoption agencies.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
@Starvalleybotany The problem is that the adoption agency issue is only the beginning of the floodgates that will continue to hinder religious freedoms. The Bishops of the Catholic Church pleaded with the governments in Washington D.C. and Massachusetts for exemptions. Ironically, the very people who changed the definition of marriage in the name of "tolerance" and "compassion" failed to practice it themselves.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom I don't agree with that. I think a religious institution should be able to adopt children to whomever they wish they can adopt children to. If they decide only to adopt children only to Catholic families or only to traditional Christian families then that is their right. They are a religious institution after all.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom I'd say this preacher's preaching has the general support in the Bible in the sense of practicing tolerance and love.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
@Starvalleybotany What are the Biblical references that support what the priest is saying.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." Matt. 7:12 & Jesus said "If ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren ye have done it unto me." Matthew 25:40. Do you think gay people (people who are innately oriented toward their own gender) feel you are loving them and doing kind things to them by telling them that their love is evil or "sinful"? It's hypocritical and self-righteous to act that way. It drives these people away from Christ not toward Him.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Starvalleybotany "Do unto others..." and "If ye have done it unto the least of these..." does not mean that Christians should tell people that it is OK to sin. Properly understood, it means that they should be taught the truth about their unrighteousness in a compassionate way. Not because they are hated, but because they want the gay people to suffer eternal punishment.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom Your interpretation of what certain "sins" are and what are not are different than what this minister and many mainline Christians have. You might consider going to the Evangelicals Concerned Western Region Website and reading up on several scholars historical research on this topic. You would learn a lot but then at the same time the following quote is in order...
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
@Starvalleybotany Sin is an action/behavior that prevents a person from entering the Kingdom of God. For example, 1 Corinthians 6 lists the kinds of actions/behaviors that prevent people from entering the Kingdom.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom Being drunk is considered something that keeps a person from entering into the Kingdom of God according to these passages. Erring on the side of grace is far better than erring on the side of legalism. Grace is what we are all saved by not through works. Paul even spoke about that. After all is said and done none of us is "worthy" to enter into the Kingdom but because of Christ's infinite sacrifice that has changed.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A Catholic would be a good person to discuss this with. For the most part, as I understand it, Christianity in general is the path that leads to salvation. What transgressions that the leaders of Christian Churches commit is not a reflection of the truth as it is revealed in the Bible (or even the Tradition of historic Christian Churches).
O'Connor is a Rastafarian who wants to use the abuse issue in the Catholic Church to push her own agenda. (Grammar corrected)
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom Also I think the Roman Catholic Church needs to pull the gigantic beam from its own eye before it tries to pull the mote out of societies eye. They have such immense hypocrisy when it comes to several issues that they seriously need to clean their own house before they tell others their houses are in need of cleaning.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
Not everyone who is Catholic (especially the priests) is involved with sexual improprieties. The Catholic Church is made up of individuals, like any other organization - there are some who are good - there are some who are not. The hypocrisy of a small percentage does not void the efficacy of the Gospel message nor does it render useless all the good things that the Catholic Church has done over and still does all over the world.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom It's always the argument "a small pecentage" that makes it look like these are isolated incidents. Sorry but I don't buy that for one second. Sure that does not negate the Gospel message of Jesus' but it certainly does negate the credibility of the leaders who purport to carry that message. It would be better that the Christian go out in to the woods or on a mountain alone (and or with their families) with their Bibles. They would likely learn far more in a few days...
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
If Christians waited for all their leaders to become saints nothing would ever be accomplished.
As far as the unshakable message of the Scriptures is concerned, it is clear about what the message is as it relates to the issue of the video.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom Yes Christians need to study the Bible on their own. I rest my case.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
No material was given to support the ''case'' that Jesus would oppose Proposal B. Christians reading the Bible? No one was arguing about that.
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom than they would learn in an entire year of going through the hollow ritual and wrote prayers of Catholicism.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
Some people just look for opportunities to slip in some anti-Catholicism. What do rituals and ''wrote'' prayers have to do with the issue in the video?
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom I explained that Christians would gain more from their own personal reading of the Bible than going and listening to many months of preaching about it. This was a side issue that you and I were discussing. It has little to do with the video.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
Anti-Catholic statements aside (''hollow rituals'' - as if they really don't mean anything), where does the Bible directly address or infer that Jesus would agree with what the priest in the video claims?
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago
@redgoldbluephantom Jesus' words of tolerance and love. You might want to read and study the Sermon on the Mount and you also might wish to live it yourself because many of the posts I have seen you post here would show that you are a Christian in name only but your heart definitely does not reflect the Spirit of Christ as I have seen Him in the New Testament scriptures.
Starvalleybotany 1 year ago
It is very strange people who claim to be non-judgmental and tolerant making judgments about people based upon politically correct notion that has no basis in the Gospel. The Sermon on the Mount was not about homosexuals and the redefinition of marriage to suit them. Invoking the ever popularly vague ''Spirit of Christ'' does not negate those values that are solidly founded in the Scriptures (e.g. the teachings in the New Testament that categorize homosexuality with adultery and murder).
redgoldbluephantom 1 year ago