Is it me

[JW Frogen]

1Cr 6:10 nor drunkards, nor revilers, , shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Can I at least rent?

 

[dilloduck]

Romans 1:26-27
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another, Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

I CORINTHIANS 6:9-10

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1Cr 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

I'm getting this figured out-----some flock of birds or something are inheriting the earth cuz humans don't stand a chance. Budgies prolly.

 

[Modbert]

I'm getting this figured out-----some flock of birds or something are inheriting the earth cuz humans don't stand a chance. Budgies prolly.

Pretty much. The trees can inherit the earth. And as we saw in LOTR, they can walk around.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Perfect.

I always wonder why no one discusses ethics here.

Oh, that's right. Because lefterals don't know what the word means.

Thank you and carry on.

HEY, i don't know what the word lefterals means.

ethics are nice, non-partisan, non-religious. could be a good discussion. hahaha

if there weren't so many fucktards who want to monopolize their kind of "ethics" and inject religious dogma into "ethics".

 

[foggedinn]

If you've read the Bible, you already know the answer. If you haven't, I guess you're here just stirring the pot.

I have read the bible, I'm just asking which testament you're using specifically. I assume the Old Testament am I right?

I read the OT KJV when I was eight, over fifty years ago. It's part of me; the first real book I ever read. I've read both old and new Testaments cover to cover half a dozen times since. There are verses in the Books of Moses and the writings of the Apostle Paul that are equally harsh on the subject.

 

[foggedinn]

No definitions were found for lefterals.

Must be a made up word.

 

[Modbert]

Enter Stage Left:

1All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God's name and our teaching may not be slandered. 2Those who have believing masters are not to show less respect for them because they are brothers. Instead, they are to serve them even better, because those who benefit from their service are believers, and dear to them. These are the things you are to teach and urge on them.

- 1 Timothy: 6:1-2

5Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.

- Ephesians 6:5

Oh and Allie, God says to STFU.

11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15But women[a] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

- 1 Timothy 2:11-15

And once again:

3For God is not a God of disorder but of peace. As in all the congregations of the saints, 34women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

- 1 Corinthians 14:33-35

But how exactly was one qualified to follow Christ?

6"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple.

- Luke 14:26

I mean women must have some say no?

2Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

- Ephesians 5:22-24

Back to the Slaves for a moment, certainly God must have some compassion for them no?

47"That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.

- Luke 12:47-48

Err, I guess not.

But back on marriage, certainly God supports it no?

25Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy. 26Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are. 27Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife. 28But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.

- 1 Corinthians 7:25-28



Okay, but back to the slaves, obviously God must of been against such a thing right?

2Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.

- Colossians 3:22



Of course, that handy little book also says that Gays should die. Got your stones ready there Allie?

 

[Avatar4321]

So i guess its not me.

 

[Si modo]

So i guess its not me.

It's not just you. It's pretty inane here generally. I suppose it's the trade-off of few rules for freedom of speech or a real debate about religion combined with the ever-present assclown members.

What might be cool is having a special thread for just that - rules of debate only and moderated for that. I have participated in such arenas before and found them rewarding and informative. All of the participants did. Although the administration has strongly suggested it here, those suggestions fall on the deaf ears of assclowns.

 

[L.K.Eder]

So i guess its not me.

It's not just you. It's pretty inane here generally. I suppose it's the trade-off of few rules for freedom of speech or a real debate about religion combined with the ever-present assclown members.

What might be cool is having a special thread for just that - rules of debate only and moderated for that. I have participated in such arenas before and found them rewarding and informative. All of the participants did. Although the administration has strongly suggested it here, those suggestions fall on the deaf ears of assclowns.

stop pretending and get on topic. you wanted it, now put up. everyone can be a bully.

 

[Si modo]

So i guess its not me.

It's not just you. It's pretty inane here generally. I suppose it's the trade-off of few rules for freedom of speech or a real debate about religion combined with the ever-present assclown members.

What might be cool is having a special thread for just that - rules of debate only and moderated for that. I have participated in such arenas before and found them rewarding and informative. All of the participants did. Although the administration has strongly suggested it here, those suggestions fall on the deaf ears of assclowns.

stop pretending and get on topic. you wanted it, now put up. everyone can be a bully.

Fascinating. The topic is "Is it me ...." which I directly addressed. I've bolded it for those not so perceptive.

 

[L.K.Eder]

It's not just you. It's pretty inane here generally. I suppose it's the trade-off of few rules for freedom of speech or a real debate about religion combined with the ever-present assclown members.

What might be cool is having a special thread for just that - rules of debate only and moderated for that. I have participated in such arenas before and found them rewarding and informative. All of the participants did. Although the administration has strongly suggested it here, those suggestions fall on the deaf ears of assclowns.

stop pretending and get on topic. you wanted it, now put up. everyone can be a bully.

Fascinating. The topic is "Is it me ...." which I directly addressed. I've bolded it for those not so perceptive.

yeah yeah, you are the first to answer to a thread called "attention all idiots" and are oblivious to how that looks. you got served in the other thread.

 

[Si modo]

stop pretending and get on topic. you wanted it, now put up. everyone can be a bully.

Fascinating. The topic is "Is it me ...." which I directly addressed. I've bolded it for those not so perceptive.

yeah yeah, you are the first to answer to a thread called "attention all idiots" and are oblivious to how that looks. you got served in the other thread.

Your babbling on about something is not quite on topic. The topic is a poster wondering if the threads on religion here are lame or is it just him. Perhaps you could address the topic.

 

[Diuretic]

Perfect.

I always wonder why no one discusses ethics here.

Oh, that's right. Because lefterals don't know what the word means.

Thank you and carry on.

The first thinkers about ethics were pagans. Maybe they were even atheists! Perish the thought eh?

 

[foggedinn]

Perfect.

I always wonder why no one discusses ethics here.

Oh, that's right. Because lefterals don't know what the word means.

Thank you and carry on.

The first thinkers about ethics were pagans. Maybe they were even atheists! Perish the thought eh?

I would imagine that people thought about ethics before the written word. (i.e. pre-history)Maybe they were pagens, I doubt they were atheists.

Mans first question to God as recorded in scripture was certainly a question about ethics. It was asked by Cain, not a pagan or atheist.

Am I my brothers keeper?.

 

[Diuretic]

Perfect.

I always wonder why no one discusses ethics here.

Oh, that's right. Because lefterals don't know what the word means.

Thank you and carry on.

The first thinkers about ethics were pagans. Maybe they were even atheists! Perish the thought eh?

I would imagine that people thought about ethics before the written word. (i.e. pre-history)Maybe they were pagens, I doubt they were atheists.

Mans first question to God as recorded in scripture was certainly a question about ethics. It was asked by Cain, not a pagan or atheist.

Am I my brothers keeper?.

Wait a minute, wait a minute. I'm not letting you get away with that one. The idea of "ethics" is older than that of the Bible. Using the myth of Cain and Abel is not putting forward a piece of evidence. There are writings about what's right and wrong going back to Babylon and before. Chucking in a myth isn't playing fair.

 

[Fatality]

Or do we have the lamest topics on religion in here?

its not you

 

[amrchaos]

It must be you.

Must be. cause obviously everyone loves discussing things that seem to matter so little in religion.

Seirously, The flood? evolution? Which religion is pure evil? what's it matter?

Yeah--there are a lot of lame topics. But some think those are the biggest questions in existance.

Bottomline--Gunny is not doing his job!! Is he out sick or what?

 

[Avatar4321]

It must be you.

Must be. cause obviously everyone loves discussing things that seem to matter so little in religion.

Seirously, The flood? evolution? Which religion is pure evil? what's it matter?

Yeah--there are a lot of lame topics. But some think those are the biggest questions in existance.

Bottomline--Gunny is not doing his job!! Is he out sick or what?

Biggest questions? i feel like most of those are like the "How many angels can fit on the head of a pin" type questions. Completely irrelevant.

 

[eagleseven]

Yes, the religion forum here is pretty lame.

The source of the problem, however, is the forum participants. In particular, religion is an intensely personal and emotional issue, and so most default to rhetorical attacks and emotional bludgeons, as they feel personally threatened by the discussion.