But I have wasted enough time on this thread debating with someone so obtuse *cough* Syrius *cough*. And in general. I am issuing no further responses.
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
When did we become Iran? Religion is based on myth.
Not likely.Many Right Wingers would agree with you that the father had every right to kill his son.North Hills Father Charged With Murder for Allegedly Shooting Son Because He Was Gay
From the names it looks like this is a muslim family.
The son was probably being obnoxious and badgering his father demanding dad meet his demands. The old man couldn't take it any more.
Many left wingers as well ..
So, if I murder someone (or many people) before I become a Christian and then don't murder anyone after I become a Christian, it's all cool? All is forgiven and forgotten? It's like those murders never happened? How cool.What ever Kim Davis did she did before she became a Christian. What did she do after she became a Christian? How many marriages?
Or anyone else.I'd be more inclined to hunt down and murder my kid's grade school teachers who told him it was a viable "lifestyle" instead of a mental illness.
Then again you are just inclined to look for an excuse to kill homosexuals.
Way different for Buddhists.So, if I murder someone (or many people) before I become a Christian and then don't murder anyone after I become a Christian, it's all cool? All is forgiven and forgotten? It's like those murders never happened? How cool.What ever Kim Davis did she did before she became a Christian. What did she do after she became a Christian? How many marriages?
But when gays want to marry, something that isn't even mentioned in the Bible
Ahh I was hoping not to go here, but alas we are here.
1) Each and every time the Bible mentions marriage, it is between one man, and one woman, through instruction or example.
"If he take another wife for himself; her food, her clothing, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish"
Exodus 21:10
If a man has two wives,and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons but the firstborn is the son of the wife he does not love, when he wills his property to his sons, he must not give the rights of the firstborn to the son of the wife he loves in preference to his actual firstborn, the son of the wife he does not love
Deuteronomy 21:15-16
When Esau was forty years old, he married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and also Basemath daughter of Elon the Hittite.
Gen 26:34
Now there was a certain man of Ramathaimzophim, of mount Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephrathite: 2 And he had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah: and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children
1 Samuel 1-2
And [King Solomon] had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.
1 Kings 11: 1-3
Man and woman, man and woman. If it allowed for same sex marriage, don't you think it would have issued instructions for them as well on how to be gay and how not to be gay, or what not to do if you are gay? It would be contradictory to issue instructions on traditional marriage, and then give instructions on something that it would find adulterous and sexually immoral.
There's a big reason why it doesn't mention homosexual marriage. It specifically addresses the interactions between men and women in the proper way to maintain a heterosexual marriage. Genesis 2:24 mentions marriage as a man leaving home and family to unite with his wife. Right there, from the very beginning. Man and woman. And the coup de grace is 1 Corinthians 7:2 "But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband." Note the usage of the nouns "his" and "her." What is meant by "sexual immorality?" See my second point.
2) Excluding the "you will be put to death" part in Leviticus 18:22, God made his will and position on homosexuality clear. They commit an abomination. He does not condone it. In Malachi 3:6, God says, "I the LORD do not change", therefore his position on same sex marriage never changed either, even in the New Testament, even after he renewed the covenant with Israel. God's will is eternal, and it doesn't cease to be in that blank space in the Bible between Old Testament and New. As a Christian, I consider these points non debatable. I have gone over it many times before. I have debated it plenty of times before, I have also tried looking at it from your vantage point. But I find such a vantage point to be incompatible with what the Bible, and therefore God, do say about marriage. You can debate my position all you wish, but it will not change.
And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
Mathew 19:9
Interesting, they were all polygamous marriages not homosexual marriages. Once again a man marrying two or more women. Still heterosexual. Multiple women committed to one man. I'm not interested in lineage. And this fails to make your case.So 'each and 'every time'....except those two times. And this one.
With Moses had at least 2 wives. Zipporah (Exodus 2: 21) and the Cushite wife (Numbers 12:1). And before you try to argue that Ziporah was the Cushite....Numbers 10: 29 makes it ludicrously clear that Moses' father law was a Midianite. Making Zipporah a Midianite
The Bible doesn't condemn same sex marriage. It does condemn divorce
According to your relationship with God, it is all forgiven. It is cool. It's like being born afain. That's why it's called a born again Christian.So, if I murder someone (or many people) before I become a Christian and then don't murder anyone after I become a Christian, it's all cool? All is forgiven and forgotten? It's like those murders never happened? How cool.What ever Kim Davis did she did before she became a Christian. What did she do after she became a Christian? How many marriages?
You hate Americans because of who they are
Interesting, they were all polygamous marriages not homosexual marriages. Once again a man marrying two or more women. Still heterosexual. Multiple women committed to one man. I'm not interested in lineage. And this fails to make your case.So 'each and 'every time'....except those two times. And this one.
With Moses had at least 2 wives. Zipporah (Exodus 2: 21) and the Cushite wife (Numbers 12:1). And before you try to argue that Ziporah was the Cushite....Numbers 10: 29 makes it ludicrously clear that Moses' father law was a Midianite. Making Zipporah a Midianite
The Bible doesn't condemn same sex marriage. It does condemn divorce
So you flatly ignored what I said and repeated a falsehood.
God made himself clear in Leviticus it was an abomination. That position never changed, his will remained the same. So did God just change his mind?
Wow, what a bargain. I can go around murdering people and then be 'born again' and forgiven. Rinse and repeat. Such a deal.According to your relationship with God, it is all forgiven. It is cool. It's like being born again. That's why it's called a born again Christian.So, if I murder someone (or many people) before I become a Christian and then don't murder anyone after I become a Christian, it's all cool? All is forgiven and forgotten? It's like those murders never happened? How cool.What ever Kim Davis did she did before she became a Christian. What did she do after she became a Christian? How many marriages?
No more than you explicitly and carefully editing out any mention of Kim Davis and refusing to address it.
Yet Kim Davis ignored all of it and happily allows marriage licenses to be issued to those remarrying after a divorce.
You'd agree that Kim Davis certainly was, yes?
It is a permissible reading of the [free exercise clause]...to say that if prohibiting the exercise of religion is not the object of the [law] but merely the incidental effect of a generally applicable and otherwise valid provision, the First Amendment has not been offended.... To make an individual's obligation to obey such a law contingent upon the law's coincidence with his religious beliefs, except where the State's interest is "compelling"–permitting him, by virtue of his beliefs, "to become a law unto himself,"–contradicts both constitutional tradition and common sense. To adopt a true "compelling interest" requirement for laws that affect religious practice would lead towards anarchy.
I'm not blaming gays, just the mentally ill gay son..
Yet you have indeed been blaming gays- providing your own kooky theory that all gays are mentally ill- a theory that was discredited 42 years ago.
You have assigned your self judge and jury and have exonerated the father and blamed the person who was killed based upon your "in depth investigative analysis" that lead you to suggest incorrectly that the family was Muslim.
This was indeed a tragedy. Two people are dead. A father is in jail.
And you want to use the incident to spin your tales for whatever nefarious purpose you have.