Savage fired by MSNBC

[Tekneek]

Hah. So, who is this authority that determines what is the ultimate truth? I trust it isn't humans determining this, because who knows what mistakes they may be making.

[vtbub]

Also, what makes you think The Bible is the ultimate truth?

The Koran isn't? The Book of Mormon? Sacred writings of Hindus and Buddists?

That wasn't meant to inflame you, just what is your take on scriptures in other religions.

I don't have a problems with your beliefs, because they are yours. What I don't like is the lack of tolerance for different point of views, in general, not specifically you.

[Tekneek]

I am not trying to make this personal. I'm not sure I understand how any book written by human beings finds the 'ultimate truth' but other books also written by human beings are presumed to fall short of the 'ultimate truth' with no evidence either way.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by vtbub
Also, what makes you think The Bible is the ultimate truth?

Well, this would take a very long time to go into in detail, and I seriously doubt it would even be productive. IF the Bible is ultimate truth, then my position makes sense.

[vtbub]

I'm not trying to pick a fight here. I am truly curious.

[Axxon]

Originally posted by SkyDog
Well, this would take a very long time to go into in detail, and I seriously doubt it would even be productive. IF the Bible is ultimate truth, then my position makes sense.

I agree with that. I do have an off the wall question which really isn't related to the discussion but..

The first commandment states:
First "I am The Lord your God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me."

Note it doesn't say there are no other Gods nor that you shouldn't believe in them, just that you shouldn't put them before him. Seems fair enough to me.

Do you believe that a pantheistic reality exists or was God stating something that isn't true, which seems not something he'd likely do? Most christians I've met seem to think there is only one God but still don't think that he was lying here. If there is more than one God, and note, he doesn't claim superiority over them, merely that he hooked them up so they better worship him ( which again seems fair ), then could there not also be more than one "ultimate truth"?

[Axxon]

OK, I lied, it is related but I'm too lazy to edit.

[Axxon]

Here's an article discussing early biblical polytheism.

http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/MSmith_BiblicalMonotheism.htm

[Tekneek]

If _Communion_ is true, then extra-terrestrials HAVE visited the planet and abducted human beings. Which 'based on a true story' books are we supposed to believe and which are we not? We shouldn't believe aliens have come and abducted people, that is way too outlandish. However, we should believe in a God that used to speak to people, burning shrubs, a sea being parted, resurrections, turning water into wine, and other 'miracles' found in the _Holy Bible_.

Is it because believers of _Communion_ don't set up churches? Is that the difference? More people believe the _Holy Bible_, so therefore it is true?

I know this is going off on a tangent. Most people agree that Savage, even if he thinks he is in agreement with God when he tells people to 'get AIDS and die', he deserved to get fired. That's a good thing.

By the way, can anyone tell me what morals are being taught in the following Commandments :

Thou shalt have no other gods before me

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image

Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy

Thou shalt not covet

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by Axxon
I agree with that. I do have an off the wall question which really isn't related to the discussion but..

The first commandment states:
First "I am The Lord your God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me."

Note it doesn't say there are no other Gods nor that you shouldn't believe in them, just that you shouldn't put them before him. Seems fair enough to me.

Do you believe that a pantheistic reality exists or was God stating something that isn't true, which seems not something he'd likely do? Most christians I've met seem to think there is only one God but still don't think that he was lying here. If there is more than one God, and note, he doesn't claim superiority over them, merely that he hooked them up so they better worship him ( which again seems fair ), then could there not also be more than one "ultimate truth"?

Well, I haven't studied that in particular. However, I know growing up I was taught that the use of the word "gods" doesn't necessarily imply putting other "deities" first--that anything, be it money, popularity, sex, etc. etc. etc. can become a "god."

[Axxon]

Yeah, I was taught that too but was surprised to learn that monotheism was a relatively late entry into the judeo-christian scene once I got more religious training in high school and college. It always interested me.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by vtbub
I'm not trying to pick a fight here. I am truly curious.

OK. The VERY short version. (I've got a meeting at 2:30, then I need to finish preparing (ironic.....) for a Bible Study that I'm teaching tonight.

1. REASONS I BELIEVE THAT THE BIBLE IS GOD'S WORD
a. personal experience
b. fulfilled prophecy
c. historical accuracy
d. amazing preservation of meaning/intent of original texts over thousands of years

2. REASON I BELIEVE THAT THE OTHERS AREN'T
Well, again, IF the Bible is ultimate truth, then the statement that it makes that it is the final and infallible Word of God pretty much knocks everything else out.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally posted by Axxon
I don't believe that you can claim right and wrong in regards to morality.

...

I'm working on my own log, not someone elses mote.

It's puzzling to me that someone who obviously has spent a considerable time in the study of scripture would say that there is no authoritative source for what is right or wrong.

2Tm:3:14: But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
2Tm:3:15: And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
2Tm:3:16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

[clintl]

Originally posted by Tekneek
By the way, can anyone tell me what morals are being taught in the following Commandments :

Thou shalt have no other gods before me

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image

Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy

Thou shalt not covet

According to Judeo-Christian tradition, not believing is one of the worst possible sins. All of these are tied into that idea.

[Easy Mac]

I don't think you can argue for the preservation of intent and menaing. Each translator of the Bible has had to make their own interpretation of a passages intent and meaning.

And I don't have the bible memorized word for word, but does it say in the Old Testament that Jesus will die on the cross. Hell, Nostradomus said a great man will be strike by a bolt from the sky, and people have interpreted that to mean JFK, but that doesn't mean a prophecy has been fullfilled.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by Easy Mac
IAnd I don't have the bible memorized word for word, but does it say in the Old Testament that Jesus will die on the cross. Hell, Nostradomus said a great man will be strike by a bolt from the sky, and people have interpreted that to mean JFK, but that doesn't mean a prophecy has been fullfilled.

Read Isaiah 53, and Psalm 22. The 22nd Psalm is particularly interesting, as it was written before there was such a thing AS crucifixion.

OK. I really gotta go now. Gotta be somewhere in 13 minutes, and it'll take me at least 10 to get there.

[Easy Mac]

cool, gracias

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Easy Mac
I don't think you can argue for the preservation of intent and menaing. Each translator of the Bible has had to make their own interpretation of a passages intent and meaning.

And I don't have the bible memorized word for word, but does it say in the Old Testament that Jesus will die on the cross. Hell, Nostradomus said a great man will be strike by a bolt from the sky, and people have interpreted that to mean JFK, but that doesn't mean a prophecy has been fullfilled.

Agreed. See my link on the Bible and passages relevant to gays listed above.

[Axxon]

Originally posted by Franklinnoble
It's puzzling to me that someone who obviously has spent a considerable time in the study of scripture would say that there is no authoritative source for what is right or wrong.

If you want to know the story I'll tell it. It is WHY I spent a lot of time in the study of scripture.

When I was a young child, and I do mean very young, I was a religious prodigy. At the age of 6 I had a baptist preacher try and adopt me from my family to make me "the next Billy Graham." He was a distant relative but still...

At the age of 7 I was the youngest person baptised at the church I was attending. I had to have meetings with the pastor to prove that I was being baptised by my own will and that I understood what I was doing and it was what I wanted.

That was the year I got the town drunk ( we were a small town )to come back to church and it was seen as a big thing. All I did was talk to the man. That kind of influence scares me to this day. I want no part of that; what if I steer them wrong?

This was all fine and good until I hit 14. At that point I could no longer accept a lot of what I was reading and being told. I had a very personal relationship with God and in my heart I could not accept that what I was being told inside was the same as what I was being taught outside but I didn't want to offend God or get him on my bad side. Quite frankly, hell scared me back then.

I can still remember the day that I made "the promise." I said to the God inside that I loved him dearly but there was no way I could be satisfied with what I was hearing from everybody else. I felt there had to be more to the story and that I wanted to find out what that more was but I didn't want to burn in hell for my curiosity but I had to learn more. I promised that no matter what I learned, no matter where it took me, I was doing it for him and I wanted him to always know that and to realize that if I went astray it was for all the right reasons.

I then began really studying spirituality and religion on my own and in earnest. Over the years I've seen that it's really all the same, basically. All that really separates the religions is the man made rules. They all say don't kill, they all have "the golden rule" etc. We have tortured and killed people simply because of dietary laws and when it's ok to eat meet. It's insanity.

Ultimately I divorced myself of any branch of religion but I give every one of them ( including athiests ) the utmost respect. I don't joke about them or mock them, I just can't be a hypocrite and join a group that ultimately will limit my true faith and belief and since I truly don't believe that there is only one right answer and that God is wise and loving enough to see everyone on their own merits I don't really have to limit myself that way.

I don't think that the bible is a bad thing. It's a good thing and it's there to make sure people understand what's right and wrong but it's not the only book God put out there to do that. He has to reach a whole hell of a lot of folks and he has to make sure that they can understand the message and it works with their culture and their understanding of the world. Hell, even Jesus used parables to get folks to understand.

When people misuse the Bible to make their points and I know that they are misusing it ( as opposed to interpreting it in a way that I disagree with ) it burns me up. Same with any other religious tome.

I guess I believe that God is everywhere and in everything and is available to teach us and learn with us and about us all the time not just on sunday and with one book. It doesn't work for me. I'd never presume to tell others that it wouldn't or won't work for them. Obviously it does.

Sometimes I like to make them think a little but there's nothing wrong with that.

Phew, I guess that got awful sappy and maudlin didn't it?

[sabotai]

"I could stand atop the Sears Tower, and say all day, "I don't believe in the Law of Gravity" and fully believe that it doesn't exist. It doesn't matter what I say. It doesn't matter what I believe. If I walk off the edge, I WILL fall. In the same way, it doesn't matter whether you or I believe it is immoral. It is, and neither of us can change that."

Ladies and gentlemen, we've found our new mrskippy.

[Easy Mac]

Oh, just for the record, the Psalm 22 I read has no mention of the crucifixion. Jesus says, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?", but hey, I've been known to quote obscure movies, so its not out of the realm of possibility that Jesus would quote an obscure Bible reference.

But as we know, not every bible is written the same, so perhaps something was lost or gained in various translations.

[digamma]

Also, to play devil's advocate, I don't think it is a given point that you can't have morals without a higher authority.

I think this is the argument C.S. Lewis sort of makes in his book Mere Christianity. He traces different civilizations and religions and notes that they all have certain basic tenets. The leap though is that these basic tenets common to most religions are "divine law," coming from a higher authority.

Another possibility though, is simply that the desire to survive led man to creat laws and moral codes to preserve himself. In order to exit Locke's "state of nature" man had to make rules for getting along with others and surviving. Not killing others, not stealing from others, etc. would be basic rules that would help man survive and prosper. I'm not sure that it necessarily takes a higher authority to get to this point.

[sabotai]

*notes that Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 says nothing about crucifixition.*

*notes that Psalm 22:21 mentions unicorns.*

[Axxon]

Originally posted by sabotai
*notes that Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 says nothing about crucifixition.*

*notes that Psalm 22:21 mentions unicorns.*

Well, the psalms were basically songs so using them to prove anything on either side is pretty whacked.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally posted by Axxon
If you want to know the story I'll tell it. It is WHY I spent a lot of time in the study of scripture.

When I was a young child, and I do mean very young, I was a religious prodigy. At the age of 6 I had a baptist preacher try and adopt me from my family to make me "the next Billy Graham." He was a distant relative but still...

At the age of 7 I was the youngest person baptised at the church I was attending. I had to have meetings with the pastor to prove that I was being baptised by my own will and that I understood what I was doing and it was what I wanted.

That was the year I got the town drunk ( we were a small town )to come back to church and it was seen as a big thing. All I did was talk to the man. That kind of influence scares me to this day. I want no part of that; what if I steer them wrong?

This was all fine and good until I hit 14. At that point I could no longer accept a lot of what I was reading and being told. I had a very personal relationship with God and in my heart I could not accept that what I was being told inside was the same as what I was being taught outside but I didn't want to offend God or get him on my bad side. Quite frankly, hell scared me back then.

I can still remember the day that I made "the promise." I said to the God inside that I loved him dearly but there was no way I could be satisfied with what I was hearing from everybody else. I felt there had to be more to the story and that I wanted to find out what that more was but I didn't want to burn in hell for my curiosity but I had to learn more. I promised that no matter what I learned, no matter where it took me, I was doing it for him and I wanted him to always know that and to realize that if I went astray it was for all the right reasons.

I then began really studying spirituality and religion on my own and in earnest. Over the years I've seen that it's really all the same, basically. All that really separates the religions is the man made rules. They all say don't kill, they all have "the golden rule" etc. We have tortured and killed people simply because of dietary laws and when it's ok to eat meet. It's insanity.

Ultimately I divorced myself of any branch of religion but I give every one of them ( including athiests ) the utmost respect. I don't joke about them or mock them, I just can't be a hypocrite and join a group that ultimately will limit my true faith and belief and since I truly don't believe that there is only one right answer and that God is wise and loving enough to see everyone on their own merits I don't really have to limit myself that way.

I don't think that the bible is a bad thing. It's a good thing and it's there to make sure people understand what's right and wrong but it's not the only book God put out there to do that. He has to reach a whole hell of a lot of folks and he has to make sure that they can understand the message and it works with their culture and their understanding of the world. Hell, even Jesus used parables to get folks to understand.

When people misuse the Bible to make their points and I know that they are misusing it ( as opposed to interpreting it in a way that I disagree with ) it burns me up. Same with any other religious tome.

I guess I believe that God is everywhere and in everything and is available to teach us and learn with us and about us all the time not just on sunday and with one book. It doesn't work for me. I'd never presume to tell others that it wouldn't or won't work for them. Obviously it does.

Sometimes I like to make them think a little but there's nothing wrong with that.

Phew, I guess that got awful sappy and maudlin didn't it?

Fascinating story... thank you for sharing.

Do you believe everything Jesus said in the Bible to be true?

[sabotai]

*notes that unicorns also appear in Job, Deuteronomy, Numbers, Isaiah and Daniel*

[Axxon]

Originally posted by Franklinnoble
Fascinating story... thank you for sharing.

Do you believe everything Jesus said in the Bible to be true?

I hate to use definitive statements because then some biblical lawyer will hit me with something but basically yes, I believe that all of his teachings are fundamentally true. I can't think of one that I don't accept. Again, though, my interpretation of the words of Jesus certainly may not 100% agree with traditional biblical scholarship.

I have one example in mind that definately doesn't and it's definately different but doesn't really warp his teaching, just I disagree with the relevance of the statement.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally posted by Axxon
I hate to use definitive statements because then some biblical lawyer will hit me with something but basically yes, I believe that all of his teachings are fundamentally true. I can't think of one that I don't accept. Again, though, my interpretation of the words of Jesus certainly may not 100% agree with traditional biblical scholarship.

I have one example in mind that definately doesn't and it's definately different but doesn't really warp his teaching, just I disagree with the relevance of the statement.

I'm only asking because most people will agree that Jesus was a real person, he was an honest person, and he wasn't insane or anything.

That said, Jesus also did claim to be the son of God, and that:

Joh:14:6: Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

[KWhit]

Originally posted by Easy Mac

But as we know, not every bible is written the same, so perhaps something was lost or gained in various translations.

Actually Galt's link from earlier in the thread about homosexuality in the bible has some great points about this. It's definitely worth a look if you really want to get closer to understanding what the bible does and doesn't say about gay activities, which is very important because many that think homosexuality is immoral point to the bible for "proof".



Another interesting point I found:

One of the major verses that is used to refute homosexuality is

Leviticus 20:13:
"If a man lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination and they shall surely be put to death."



And yet, just a few lines down is this verse:

Leviticus 20:13:
"If a man lies with a woman during her monthly period and has sexual relations with her, he has exposed the source of her flow, and she has also uncovered it. Both of them must be cut off from their people."


Do you guys believe that this is "morally reprehensible" as well?

[sabotai]

"Homosexuals do not pass their genetic material on, and therefore don't work to ensure the survival of this species."

And one could counter by saying that homosexuality helps to prevent over population of a species so that the species will have enough food and water to survive.

[KWhit]

Originally posted by Ronnie Dobbs2
Just for debate's sake.

The ultimate goal of any species is to pass on its genetic material to ensure the survival of said species.

Homosexuals do not pass their genetic material on, and therefore don't work to ensure the survival of this species.

Ergo, homosexuals work against the ultimate goal of the human race, and that could be classified as "morally reprehensible."

So do masturbaters.

[sabotai]

dola,

I wonder why christians never bring up the second part of that Leviticus line. They use it to support that it's an "abomination", yet they stop there...what happened to the death penalty for homosexuals? Seems like you are going against God's word by not supporting the death penelty for such an act. I mean, it really couldn't be more clear, could it?

[KWhit]

Originally posted by Ronnie Dobbs2
Just for debate's sake.

The ultimate goal of any species is to pass on its genetic material to ensure the survival of said species.

Homosexuals do not pass their genetic material on, and therefore don't work to ensure the survival of this species.

Ergo, homosexuals work against the ultimate goal of the human race, and that could be classified as "morally reprehensible."

Hell, in that case priests* and nuns are morally reprehensible as well!





*even the ones who don't fondle little boys.

[tucker342]

good point

[Axxon]

Originally posted by Franklinnoble
I'm only asking because most people will agree that Jesus was a real person, he was an honest person, and he wasn't insane or anything.

That said, Jesus also did claim to be the son of God, and that:

That's the one disagreement that I have that makes me not a christian. I have already written this once but deleted it and simply mentioned that it existed.

I believe that Jesus meant his life and his teaching. Indeed, if you follow his teachings and do your best to follow his examples you will surely be welcomed by the father; our father.

The one Jesus told us to pray to, starting with the words, "Our father, who art in heaven..."

I feel we are all children of God and Jesus may well be first among the rest but he made no pretense that he was singular in that. "Our" father, who art in heaven.

I feel that to consider the crucifiction and the resurrection as the primary purpose of Jesus' life is a tragic mistake. I have actually had a christian woman tell me that her church taught that it mattered not what Christ said because what mattered was that he died for our sins therefore opening the door to heaven.

If that's the case then why did he bother teaching at all? It was the teaching and the sermons and the example he set that IS important and is the way and the "life", even if his death was somehow necessary to finalize the deal. That's what I believe he meant and it's how I try to live and again, it's the fundamental reason I certainly can't call myself a christian.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally posted by sabotai
dola,

I wonder why christians never bring up the second part of that Leviticus line. They use it to support that it's an "abomination", yet they stop there...what happened to the death penalty for homosexuals? Seems like you are going against God's word by not supporting the death penelty for such an act. I mean, it really couldn't be more clear, could it?

Everybody sins, and nobody keeps all the laws set forth in the Old Testament. Christians readily admit this.

Ro:3:23: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

Therefore, were it not for the gift of salvation from Jesus Christ, every person who ever lived would go to hell, basically.

Ro:6:23: For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Joh:3:3: Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

This doesn't mean we're perfect people after we accept Jesus as savior, nor does it mean we've been given license to sin just because we've accepted salvation.

Ro:10:8: But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
Ro:10:9: That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Ro:10:10: For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.


2Co:5:14: For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:
2Co:5:15: And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.
2Co:5:16: Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.
2Co:5:17: Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

[clintl]

Axxon, it sounds like are now a Deist.

[Axxon]

Originally posted by clintl
Axxon, it sounds like are now a Deist.

You know, you just may be right about that.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally posted by Axxon
That's the one disagreement that I have that makes me not a christian.

You callin' Jesus a liar?

(I am suddenly reminded of "Major League" - "Are you saying Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?")

[Axxon]

Originally posted by Franklinnoble
You callin' Jesus a liar?

(I am suddenly reminded of "Major League" - "Are you saying Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball?")

I loved that line from the movie.

Great movie and a classic line.

[vtbub]

If you ever played Strat Hockey in the early 90's and saw Mario Lemieux and Brett Hull's card, it would be easy to see that not even God could stop them from scoring on rebounds.

[Leonidas]

Since everyone else has gotten to share their feelings on religion I feel somewhat compelled to share some thoughts on the Koran since I have recently made a study of it and have found it very interesting.

The whole purpose of the Koran was to right the wrongs committed by "Christians" who created an off-base, organized religion in the name of Jesus Christ (namely what would become Catholicism). The premise is that while Christ was a true prophet, and the son of God, he was not himself God and he was not here to create a new religion. The Koran was written to right the wrongs committed in God's and Christ's name.

Islam is actually a sort of anti-religion. Organized religion, in the Koran, is another means to push idolotry. Islam in itself is not supposed to be a religion. The Book (the Old Testament) is for all people's of faith and is not supposed to be the root of a religion unto itself. As you may well imagine, Islamic extremists have really F'd the whole thing up and aren't even remotely close to practicing what their own Book preaches.

However, for all of the wonderful things the Koran does say it also has an awful lot of things that just make me go "huh?". Like the parts about getting virgins and wine that won't make you drunk (like what's the point of that) in paradise. Or the part where Mohammed is allowed special privileges with certain women denied to other men just because God said so (perhaps not so coincidentally through the hand of Mohammed himself). And especially the fact the Koran is a bold proponent of slavery.

The Koran recognizes the teachings of Christ, it recognizes the Old Testament simply as The Book, but it does not recognize the New Testament. Oh, and something else kind of interesting, Christians and Jews are not Infidels. The Koran acknowledges there are true believers among the Christians and Jews. While it refers to True Believers as being Muslims (people of the Faith), it does not necessarily look upon Muslims as a part of a specific religious faction. They are just the True Believers and can be of any race or even faith, as long as they are True Believers of the one true God.

Now I feel so much better for getting to spread the word on the Koran as I interpereted it. Have a Blessed Day!

[Axxon]

Originally posted by vtbub
If you ever played Strat Hockey in the early 90's and saw Mario Lemieux and Brett Hull's card, it would be easy to see that not even God could stop them from scoring on rebounds.

I did but since I not a fan of Hockey I don't remember them exactly. It's the damnedest thing but I don't like hockey but love the hockey games that are out. Strat was an extremely fun game and I spent WAY more time with it than a non hockey fan should have.

I know how the soccer hating CM fans must feel.

[Axxon]

What I'm happy and simply amazed by is how we're holding a mature, fun and flame free religion thread on FOFC. Did I warp into the twilight zone or something??

[vtbub]

Dice roll on Hull's '91 card on a rebound was pretty much straight goal. Goalie had no chance.

[Franklinnoble]

Trent: "I wish they still had fights in this game so I could bitch-slap Wayne"
Mike: "What they don't have fighting anymore?"
Trent: "Ya, doesn't that suck"
Mike: "Why'd they get rid of the fighting it's the best part of the old version"
Sue: "I think kids were hitting each other or something"
Trent: "Ya, but you make there heads bleed on this one"
Mike: "Make someone's head bleed"
Trent: "I'm making Gretzky's head bleed for super-fan #99 over here"

[sabotai]

"Everybody sins, and nobody keeps all the laws set forth in the Old Testament. Christians readily admit this."

Leviticus 20:13:
"If a man lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination and they shall surely be put to death."

(quoted so no has to go looking for it.)

Ok. So then the next question is why do christians retain the beleif in the first part of that sentance (both of them have commited an abomination) but not the second part (they shall surely be put to death)? What exactly has negated the meaning of the second part?

[Axxon]

Strictly enforced penal codes I'd imagine.

[sabotai]

Well, I know that's the reason they don't actually go out and kill homosexuals. (Well, most people). But that doesn't say why christians don't _beleive_ they should be put to death.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by sabotai
Well, I know that's the reason they don't actually go out and kill homosexuals. (Well, most people). But that doesn't say why christians don't _beleive_ they should be put to death.

Will someone please at least go to the link I posted?

It talks about that passage and 5 others used to argue that homosexuality is a sin. Here it is again:


http://www.truluck.com/html/six_bible_passages.html