Mormons march in gay pride parade

[manifold]

You know you're my boy mal but you definitely didn't answer Dr. Dork's question.

It's really not difficult to simply say, "Hell fucking NO I don't follow, believe or agree with all the laws and punishments laid out in Leviticus"

Doing so doesn't weaken your argument in the least.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nah, Del, you simply don't like the answer because it shows the question is not relevant to the discussion of homosexuality today.

If one is a believer like Mal, the answer makes perfect sense. If one is not, then it does not matter what the person thinks to a believer on this issue.

No it makes Mal a liar and hypocrite if he can label others has horrible immoral sinners for not following leviticus but doesn't hold himself to the same standard.

It's what every bigot does.

Nope, it makes you intrusive and ignorant. A Christian knows the testaments are taken together as a totality. A Christian never permit another to impose his liimited understanding of these matters on him. And a Christian never gives credence to the arguments of a non-believer or, especially, an atheist. That would be like trying to explain quantum physics to a mouse.

 

[mal]

No it makes Mal a liar and hypocrite if he can label others has horrible immoral sinners for not following leviticus but doesn't hold himself to the same standard.

It's what every bigot does.

I'm Observing the Book.



peace...

Do you follow all the rules laid out in leviticus?

Do you expect gays to follow all the rules aid out in leviticus?

Leviticus 18 is Moral Law... There is not Fish references or any of that.

Please don't be Dishonest about this.

The Bible Consistently, from Old to New, calls Homosexuality Sin and Abomination.

Christ's Blood didn't make Homosexuality NOT Sin.



peace...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Having said that, Christians are split on this matter. One can only know the will of God through the illumination of one's conscience. I would not let another Christian, much less an ignorant atheist, impose his or her understanding in place of my own in these matters. I support universal marriage, and I support Mal's right to believe as Mal does.

 

[mal]

You know you're my boy mal but you definitely didn't answer Dr. Dork's question.

It's really not difficult to simply say, "Hell fucking NO I don't follow, believe or agree with all the laws and punishments laid out in Leviticus"

Doing so doesn't weaken your argument in the least.

That's a Given mani... I was Answering Technically based on the Book.

This isn't about my Faith, whatever that may be.

It's about what the Book says.

And no, we are not Living under Levitical Moral Law and we don't Stone Women like the Muslims do because of Christ's Blood.

But Homosexuality is still a Sin according to the Bible.



peace...

 

[manifold]

No it makes Mal a liar and hypocrite if he can label others has horrible immoral sinners for not following leviticus but doesn't hold himself to the same standard.

Link?

 

[del]

You know you're my boy mal but you definitely didn't answer Dr. Dork's question.

It's really not difficult to simply say, "Hell fucking NO I don't follow, believe or agree with all the laws and punishments laid out in Leviticus"

Doing so doesn't weaken your argument in the least.

That's a Given mani... I was Answering Technically based on the Book.

This isn't about my Faith, whatever that may be.

It's about what the Book says.

And no, we are not Living under Levitical Moral Law and we don't Stone Women like the Muslims do because of Christ's Blood.

But Homosexuality is still a Sin according to the Bible.



peace...

thanks, bodey

 

[mal]

You know you're my boy mal but you definitely didn't answer Dr. Dork's question.

It's really not difficult to simply say, "Hell fucking NO I don't follow, believe or agree with all the laws and punishments laid out in Leviticus"

Doing so doesn't weaken your argument in the least.

That's a Given mani... I was Answering Technically based on the Book.

This isn't about my Faith, whatever that may be.

It's about what the Book says.

And no, we are not Living under Levitical Moral Law and we don't Stone Women like the Muslims do because of Christ's Blood.

But Homosexuality is still a Sin according to the Bible.



peace...

thanks, bodey

Are you calling me a Fag?...



peace...

 

[mal]

No it makes Mal a liar and hypocrite if he can label others has horrible immoral sinners for not following leviticus but doesn't hold himself to the same standard.

Link?

Yeah... Exactly.



peace...

 

[Ravi]

Having said that, Christians are split on this matter. One can only know the will of God through the illumination of one's conscience. I would not let another Christian, much less an ignorant atheist, impose his or her understanding in place of my own in these matters. I support universal marriage, and I support Mal's right to believe as Mal does.

Leviticus is for ceremonial law. All of it. We've had a very long thread on this for the past week. In which we discovered that Leviticus might not have mentioned homosexuality at all. It was quite a good thread for a change.

 

[del]

That's a Given mani... I was Answering Technically based on the Book.

This isn't about my Faith, whatever that may be.

It's about what the Book says.

And no, we are not Living under Levitical Moral Law and we don't Stone Women like the Muslims do because of Christ's Blood.

But Homosexuality is still a Sin according to the Bible.



peace...

thanks, bodey

Are you calling me a Fag?...



peace...

no, i'm calling you a lying toit

 

[manifold]

I'm having flashbacks to the Jungle Fever thread.


Just sayin...

 

[mal]

Having said that, Christians are split on this matter. One can only know the will of God through the illumination of one's conscience. I would not let another Christian, much less an ignorant atheist, impose his or her understanding in place of my own in these matters. I support universal marriage, and I support Mal's right to believe as Mal does.

Leviticus is for ceremonial law. All of it. We've had a very long thread on this for the past week. In which we discovered that Leviticus might not have mentioned homosexuality at all. It was quite a good thread for a change.

Wrong... 18 is Moral Law.



peace...

 

[Dr.Drock]

I'm Observing the Book.



peace...

Do you follow all the rules laid out in leviticus?

Do you expect gays to follow all the rules aid out in leviticus?

Leviticus 18 is Moral Law... There is not Fish references or any of that.

Please don't be Dishonest about this.

The Bible Consistently, from Old to New, calls Homosexuality Sin and Abomination.

Christ's Blood didn't make Homosexuality NOT Sin.



peace...

I see, so it's only leviticus 18 that should be taken seriously. (I'm sure the fact that it's anti-gay is totally a coincidence).

So if you agree with leviticus 18, than you would morally agree with killing every homosexual, yes?

 

[Dr.Drock]

No it makes Mal a liar and hypocrite if he can label others has horrible immoral sinners for not following leviticus but doesn't hold himself to the same standard.

Link?

My bad, I'm sure his gay bashing is done in the most constructive way with a Jesus type of love message behind it, especially with his love of the word fag.

And that's Sir Dr. Dork to you.

 

[manifold]

No it makes Mal a liar and hypocrite if he can label others has horrible immoral sinners for not following leviticus but doesn't hold himself to the same standard.

Link?

My bad, I'm sure his gay bashing is done in the most constructive way with a Jesus type of love message behind it, especially with his love of the word fag.

And that's Sir Dr. Dork to you.

So you can't actually substantiate your claim, but remain steadfast in refusing to acknowledge your error.

And you call mal a liar and a hypocrite! Fuck'n priceless.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Having said that, Christians are split on this matter. One can only know the will of God through the illumination of one's conscience. I would not let another Christian, much less an ignorant atheist, impose his or her understanding in place of my own in these matters. I support universal marriage, and I support Mal's right to believe as Mal does.

Leviticus is for ceremonial law. All of it. We've had a very long thread on this for the past week. In which we discovered that Leviticus might not have mentioned homosexuality at all. It was quite a good thread for a change.

The Law separates the Us from the Them. I have heard that the original L may not have included proscription of same sex relationships. A good conversation on an interesting topic without yelling informs ones' mind and calms one's soul.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Link?

My bad, I'm sure his gay bashing is done in the most constructive way with a Jesus type of love message behind it, especially with his love of the word fag.

And that's Sir Dr. Dork to you.

So you can't actually substantiate your claim, but remain steadfast in refusing to acknowledge your error.

And you call mal a liar and a hypocrite! Fuck'n priceless.

Using select excerpts and tossing around the word fag perfectly illustrates the exact description I gave. Word for word doens't have to be done in this case, or in any case frankly.

I called you a liar and a hypocrite? As you said earlier "link"?

 

[Ravi]

Link?

My bad, I'm sure his gay bashing is done in the most constructive way with a Jesus type of love message behind it, especially with his love of the word fag.

And that's Sir Dr. Dork to you.

So you can't actually substantiate your claim, but remain steadfast in refusing to acknowledge your error.

And you call mal a liar and a hypocrite! Fuck'n priceless.

Isn't saying "my bad" an acknowledgement of an error?

And his point about how mal throws around faggot is perfectly valid.

 

[manifold]

My bad, I'm sure his gay bashing is done in the most constructive way with a Jesus type of love message behind it, especially with his love of the word fag.

And that's Sir Dr. Dork to you.

So you can't actually substantiate your claim, but remain steadfast in refusing to acknowledge your error.

And you call mal a liar and a hypocrite! Fuck'n priceless.

Using select excerpts and tossing around the word fag perfectly illustrates the exact description I gave. Word for word doens't have to be done in this case, or in any case frankly.

I called you a liar and a hypocrite? As you said earlier "link"?

You levied a very specific charge against mal. Your inability to substantiate it with an actual quote from him demonstrates that your charge is indeed false. You can either admit that you were mistaken (or at the very least making a poor attempt at hyperbole), or you can continue to lie about it.

And I never said you called 'me' a liar and a hypocrite.