The homophobic thread :>

[O Really]

Question for Mr.B - do you have a reference/link/cite something I can find that defines what a "true Christian" is? I'm getting a bit confused. I understand you think that you - and ostensibly the rest of your congregation - are "true Christians," but what is the criteria? Humour me - I'm a bit detail-obsessive. They issue a fact-centric OCD card with a JD. Point me to something that defines and explains "true Christian." I promise I won't bash you for whatever you provide.

[O Really]

Good article here on "sea change" in US attitude toward gays... http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/08/14/4 ... ising.html

Note the difference in the overall population and the Republicans and (worse still) the teapartiers. Out of touch? Duh!

[O Really]

I'd say the poll is defective. It says "71% of Americans know someone who is gay." I'm pretty sure 100% of Americans know someone who is gay, whether they know it or admit it or not.

[k9nanny]

New puppy? Like her/him, I'm all ears.

Yes. Meet Zeno, the smartest German Shepherd I've ever owned. If you think his ears are notable, you should see his paws.

KKK demos are different but my experience is that the cops are mostly there to prevent unfortunate auto-marcher interactions.

Did I miss something? What's an auto-marcher? You mean running over demonstrators and/or onlookers?
I still think the cops are there to protect the demonstrators or taunters and flaunters as MrB puts it, be they gay or KKK.

[Mr.B]

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't some protestant denominations consider dancing to be sinful? Find that in the Bible, eh?"

I'm not certain they consider it a sin, but many do frown on it. Changing dance partners in slow dancing was a no-no, due to snuggling up against another's spouse/girlfriend. That's all I can think of.

"Question for Mr.B - do you have a reference/link/cite something I can find that defines what a "true Christian" is? I'm getting a bit confused. I understand you think that you - and ostensibly the rest of your congregation - are "true Christians," but what is the criteria? Humor me - I'm a bit detail-obsessive. They issue a fact-centric OCD card with a JD. Point me to something that defines and explains "true Christian." I promise I won't bash you for whatever you provide."

I have not used that term in separating Christians; that was originally started by The Ugly Sisters in the days of the old T/N forum. I've always said...are you ready for this...? "Just Because One Calls Him/Herself a Christian, Doesn't Mean They Are One" © , referring to actions of past and present people who justify their actions in the name of God. Many of you posters hold today's Christians accountable for all past crimes and atrocities committed in the name of Christianity.

Let me ask you by using this scenario...Let's say your mother or father, or either grandparent had committed a crime before you were born or when you were a child; the crime could have been heinous and cruel, or simply theft....should you, as their offspring, be held accountable all your life for their crimes?

Ever since Adam and Eve yielded to Satan's deception, most people simply have not correctly understood God's truth. They do not realize that Satan the devil has continued to deceive the overwhelming majority of humankind (see 1 John:5:19; Revelation:12:9). In so many cases, people are sincerely doing what they think is right. They simply do not understand that Satan, the real "god of this age" (2 Corinthians:4:4), has extended his deceitful, lying ways even into teachings and practices embraced by mainstream Christianity (2 Corinthians:11:13-15

The real test begins when God opens one's mind to His truth. Once the Creator begins to reveal truth to a person, that individual bears a responsibility to act on it. If that person doesn't show a willingness to live by what he or she has learned, God will add nothing more to his or her understanding. The person has shown that he really doesn't want to do even what he has already learned.

This means that whoever would become a true Christian must be willing to give his or her life to God, to always put God first (Matthew:6:33). True Christianity is not cheap; the cost is to surrender your life. It requires total commitment. A Christian will stumble or falter along the way. He may even hesitate. But with God's help, he or she will work through the obstacles and put God first in all aspects of life.
© 1995-2014 United Church of God, an International Association

[O Really]

...Let's say your mother or father, or either grandparent had committed a crime before you were born or when you were a child; the crime could have been heinous and cruel, or simply theft....should you, as their offspring, be held accountable all your life for their crimes?

I don't think so, but the anti-Dream Act people do. (Yeah, I know - off topic. But irresistible)

[Mr.B]

"Mr.B may very well have never said nor read that many in the Christian faith believe(d) inter-racial marriage to be a sin.
But it's pretty easy to find something to read about it."

Thanks for the clarification. I haven't said anything pro or con on interracial marriage because it's never been an issue with me.

Banni just pulled that on out'n his butt.

[O Really]

So today's A C-T has a (yet another) letter letter addressing homosexuality, using Bible cites as authority. In this one, he brings up Romans 1: 27-32, which appears to be the long missing New Testament reference to homosexuality. But here's my question - probably for Mr.B - why do people use the Bible as a definitive authority when addressing non- or other-believers? Would Mr.B be convinced to change his views in view of a cite to the Quran or The Vedas? Would he consider those to be credible sources for secular laws affecting all citizens? Would citing of those documents have any affect whatsoever on his views? Would he even bother to look up and read the cited parts? What do these Bible-quoting letter writers realistically expect from the (us) heathens?

[Mr.B]

"So today's A C-T has a (yet another) letter addressing homosexuality, using Bible cites as authority. In this one, he brings up Romans 1: 27-32, which appears to be the long missing New Testament reference to homosexuality."

You're not serious, are you?......"long missing"? I wonder how many times this scripture has been quoted here and in the BRN forums?
Refresher:

Romans 1:27-32 (KJV)

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another;
men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31 Without understanding, covenant-breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death,
not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

"But here's my question - probably for Mr.B - why do people use the Bible as a definitive authority when addressing non-or other-believers? Would Mr.B be convinced to change his views in view of a cite to the Quran or The Vedas? Would he consider those to be credible sources for secular laws affecting all citizens? Would citing of those documents have any affect whatsoever on his views? Would he even bother to look up and read the cited parts? What do these Bible-quoting letter writers realistically expect from the (us) heathens?"

I'm not familiar with The Vedas, and am not a reader of the Quran (or Koran), however I will do some research on your question and respond back. May take me some time though, I have other irons in the fire.

However, as Christians, we believe the Bible to be God's Word; I'm sure the other religions believe likewise, but I will find out.

[O Really]

I have read people say that "homosexuality isn't mentioned in the New Testament," but never found reason to check. But I should have quoted the entire article - it was the writer that gave the impression s/he had come up with something new. My bad. I should have known better than to give her credence even on that. Here's the entire letter...

"A recent letter regarding homosexuality states the writer has read “excerpts” from the Bible, a common practice for those who want to take verses out of context to fit what they want to believe. The letter also says several friends have read and studied the Bible “thoroughly”, and there is only one reference to homosexuality, and that is in the Old Testament. In their “thorough” study, they seem to have missed Romans 1: 27-32 (New Testament). His friends are choosing one statement and dismissing the other. However, God does not change, whether in the Old Testament, New Testament, or the 21st century. Perhaps the writer himself would benefit if he studied the Bible more thoroughly than his friends did, and find out what it really says. You can’t dismiss any part of the Bible, because it has a continuity all the way through. God’s judgment of sin, and his plan for forgiveness all the way through, culminating in the Birth of Jesus, and His death and Resurrection. This is hardly a picture of narcissism."

[O Really]

I have read people say that "homosexuality isn't mentioned in the New Testament,"...

Either you misheard or they misspoke. Jesus never said anything about homosexuality, not one word, but Paul did. He also advocated bigotry against women, in detail, but most gay-obsessed Christians ignore that part as if he was just kidding.

Wait - you mean it's possible somebody quoting Scripture regarding homosexuality might have misspoken? Surely you jest, Shirley!

On the other hand, I may have misheard, since my attention span and level of concentration for such people is way less than my interest in futbol.

[neoplacebo]

Well, then, it would seem I am the lucky recipient of several hundred death sentence reprieves, since I've historically not been one to do as I was told; by my parents, teachers, or anyone else. This has been a mixed bag; some enlightenment, some shocking reality. But I wouldn't take it back.

[Mr.B]

"But here's my question - probably for Mr.B - why do people use the Bible as a definitive authority when addressing non-or other-believers? Would Mr.B be convinced to change his views in view of a cite to the Quran or The Vedas? Would he consider those to be credible sources for secular laws affecting all citizens? Would citing of those documents have any affect whatsoever on his views? Would he even bother to look up and read the cited parts? What do these Bible-quoting letter writers realistically expect from the (us) heathens?"
I'm not familiar with The Vedas, and am not a reader of the Qu'ran (or Koran), however I will do some research on your question and respond back. May take me some time though, I have other irons in the fire.

However, as Christians, we believe the Bible to be God's Word; I'm sure the other religions believe likewise, but I will find out.

I bothered, and I found out:
Homosexuality and Islam
Homosexuality and Hinduism

O Really asked: "What do these Bible-quoting letter writers realistically expect from the (us) heathens?"
The Bible teaches us to be concerned about the salvation of others.
If you were a believer that believes that Jesus died for your sins; there was a heaven to gain and a hell to shun, and you had a relative or close friend that lived a life of pure hell. would you not be concerned for him/her? The same applies to anyone...."love thy brother as thyself".

[k9nanny]

Any particular Zeno, or do you just like the sound of the name?

the hubs found it in a list of Roman emperors. He wanted a name that wasn't already in use on his GSD forum. I prefer the Greek Zeno, he of the paradoxes.

Any old timers here might remember the infamous Zeno of Madison Count. Interesting, he made the Raleigh paper recently.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/03/01/ ... tical.html

...KKK demos are different but my experience is that the cops are mostly there to prevent unfortunate auto-marcher interactions.

...Did I miss something? What's an auto-marcher? You mean running over demonstrators and/or onlookers?
I still think the cops are there to protect the demonstrators or taunters and flaunters as MrB puts it, be they gay or KKK.

Yes, I meant auto vs. pedestrian incidents, plus that cops put a lot of person-power into making sure that traffic is disrupted as little as possible - setting up detours, encouraging the march to not spread out too far, etc.

I don't go to the 'let's beat up the Klan' demos but in my experience there's been relatively little protestor vs. counter-protestor violence. Usually, it's shouting on one side or both with calmer folks helping to keep it from getting out of control. As a peacekeeper and/or medic my biggest concern is always the cars - intentional aggression, honest flub or risky maneuvers out of impatience. Well, that and the cops being violent jerks.

OK. That would also apply to parades.
Thirty-odd years ago, there was a klan gathering in a pasture on Fruitland Road. The cops were staged there, too.

[Mr.B]

Romans 1:27-32 (KJV) "...disobedient to parents . . . worthy of death..."

"Really lucky for my niece and nephew that their parents are atheists."

The Bible says to honor your father and mother....unfortunately we live in an age where a large number of kids don't know who their father is. There can be six kids in a family, each with different fathers....such is our times. God has been kicked out of the family. Nowadays, if a kid(s) have a grudge against their parent(s), either out of anger or for their parents money, they kill them......worthy of death are they?

Anyone can be a father or mother; it's takes someone special to be a Momma and Daddy.

You said "Really lucky for my niece and nephew that their parents are atheists."

Let's say for a moment that you have 2 or 3 underage children and you realize that if you and your spouse were killed in an accident, that you would want someone to take care of your kids; or maybe you found you have just a few short months to live. Who would you choose?

Religion aside, would you want someone you could trust to raise your children in a loving, caring environment, instilling responsible, caring attitudes such as the Bible teaches, or would you rather they be raised by someone who would just be in it for the money until they reach legal age?

My point is, raise your children in a manner that you would entrust someone else to raise them in.

Anyone can be a father or mother; it's takes someone special to be a Momma and Daddy.

[O Really]

"But here's my question - probably for Mr.B - why do people use the Bible as a definitive authority when addressing non-or other-believers? Would Mr.B be convinced to change his views in view of a cite to the Quran or The Vedas? Would he consider those to be credible sources for secular laws affecting all citizens? Would citing of those documents have any affect whatsoever on his views? Would he even bother to look up and read the cited parts? What do these Bible-quoting letter writers realistically expect from the (us) heathens?"
I'm not familiar with The Vedas, and am not a reader of the Qu'ran (or Koran), however I will do some research on your question and respond back. May take me some time though, I have other irons in the fire.

However, as Christians, we believe the Bible to be God's Word; I'm sure the other religions believe likewise, but I will find out.

I bothered, and I found out:
Homosexuality and Islam
Homosexuality and Hinduism

O Really asked: "What do these Bible-quoting letter writers realistically expect from the (us) heathens?"
The Bible teaches us to be concerned about the salvation of others.
If you were a believer that believes that Jesus died for your sins; there was a heaven to gain and a hell to shun, and you had a relative or close friend that lived a life of pure hell. would you not be concerned for him/her? The same applies to anyone...."love thy brother as thyself".

Thanks, Mr.B - I'm impressed. And I learned something from your links. But the heart of my question wasn't what the Qu'ran or The Vedas had to say. I was whether you (theoretically) would give credence to them if a person wrote to the paper and said "I think the government should require all men to wear beards because it says so in this part of the Qu'ran." I'm guessing you'd say, "Who cares what the Qu'ran says, I don't follow it and neither should the government, and I ain't growing no beard."

[Mr.B]

"I'll take the moneygrubber foster parents, instead. The kids would at least be more likely to survive."

No surprise there; I knew what you'd say.

So how many Christians do you know that killed their kids for disobedience?

Your "fantasy" is working overtime; as well as is your Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

"I think the government should require all men to wear beards because it says so in this part of the Qu'ran."
"Who cares what the Qu'ran says, I don't follow it and neither should the government, and I ain't growing no beard."

Inasmuch as the government isn't the authority on the Bible or the Qu'ran, I would be inclined to agree with your scenario.

However if the Bible says it required me to have a beard, I would still be inclined to not comply;......I think.

[Mr.B]

Idiot, thy name is Vrede.......

"Peace"...... !

[Mr.B]

"Hey, if that's your best response to your heretical cherry-picking in order to rationalize your bigotry, it's fine with me."

At a loss for words, are we?

Somebody play "Hail Vrede".. ..quick, before he thinks of something cute to say!

[k9nanny]

The in-laws always fell back on the "honor thy mother and father" when they were on the losing side.
One time I couldn't resist the retort that "Do not goad your children to resentment," is also in the Bible.

"I never heard that," murmured the MIL.
Thirty years later, she's still a'goadin'.