Christianity and Homosexuality

[Kormanthor]

Jesus is the only way to the Father, if you don't believe that he is the Christ, then you have already made your choice.

There's a choice between believing in something that doesn't exist and not believing in something that doesn't exist. And no, I do not believe baby Jebus was the son of something that doesn't exist.

So you have made your decision .... we have no more to discuss.

[Mhema the Strong]

Jesus is the only way to the Father, if you don't believe that he is the Christ, then you have already made your choice.

There's a choice between believing in something that doesn't exist and not believing in something that doesn't exist. And no, I do not believe baby Jebus was the son of something that doesn't exist.

Then you have made your choice. By the way, you spelled his name wrong.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Yeah-people take the time to write something down that is WRONG from w-a-y back then. It wasn't exactly easy to record something. I'm sure if they wrote something down, it was the truth. Religion is not superstition.

So the koran is true as well, right?

[Mhema the Strong]

Why should we trust something that we built to tell US what happened when there were people from back then that told us what REALLY did happen.

Because technology, unlike a person, doesn't lie.

I don't think it knows everything. Our new technology was not there during the Roman Empire or Christopher Columbus-so how do we know that those things actually happened? If people lie than no documents found can be trusted-right????

The Bible is not a lie. I wish you would realize this.

[Buffett and Colbert]

Jesus is the only way to the Father, if you don't believe that he is the Christ, then you have already made your choice.

There's a choice between believing in something that doesn't exist and not believing in something that doesn't exist. And no, I do not believe baby Jebus was the son of something that doesn't exist.

Then you have made your choice. By the way, you spelled his name wrong.

You used an adjective when you should have used an adverb, just so you know.

[Kormanthor]

Yeah-people take the time to write something down that is WRONG from w-a-y back then. It wasn't exactly easy to record something. I'm sure if they wrote something down, it was the truth. Religion is not superstition.

So the koran is true as well, right?

No, that's not right, because the Koran doesn't believe in him being the Christ.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

I don't think it knows everything. Our new technology was not there during the Roman Empire or Christopher Columbus-so how do we know that those things actually happened? If people lie than no documents found can be trusted-right????

The Bible is not a lie. I wish you would realize this.

What is it with you and false dichotomies. Do you honestly think that "It's 100% accurate." and "They lied." are the only options?

[The Kropotkinite Union]

Jesus is the only way to the Father, if you don't believe that he is the Christ, then you have already made your choice.

There's a choice between believing in something that doesn't exist and not believing in something that doesn't exist. And no, I do not believe baby Jebus was the son of something that doesn't exist.

So you have made your decision .... we have no more to discuss.

Kormanthor, please reply to my post re: Biblical contradictions.

[Mhema the Strong]

Yeah-people take the time to write something down that is WRONG from w-a-y back then. It wasn't exactly easy to record something. I'm sure if they wrote something down, it was the truth. Religion is not superstition.

So the koran is true as well, right?

Haven't I already answered this?! If you do not believe in my religion, fine, but you don't have to make fun of it-or doubt it-especially when all the facts are there. Koran is different in many cases, and there is SO much more proof than there is of Koran anyways.

[Fartsniffage]

What is it with you and false dichotomies. Do you honestly think that "It's 100% accurate." and "They lied." are the only options?

He's about right. No historical document should be believed without other supporting documents.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

No, that's not right, because the Koran doesn't believe in him being the Christ.

Every argument he has made can be used just as easily to support Islam as it can to support Christianity. All one needs to do is replace every instance of "bible" with "koran". If he doesn't find those arguments a convincing reason to believe in Islam, then there's no reason I should find them a convincing reason to believe in Christianity.

Seriously, I've explained this like four times now. It's not a difficult concept. Why is it so hard for you people to understand?

[Great Faolan]

The problem with these overactive "Christians" is, they forgot about their own bible, their own beliefs state that we no longer live under the law and all sins are forgiven by Jesus's sacrifice.

"Judge not least ye be judged by the same measure." Or something along those lines is a worthy excerpt. If Christians were more Christ like they would be loved more and taken a little more seriously. How can you take a "religion" seriously when it has like 50 different interpretations of it's holy book?

Most Christians are hated because they don't even know what love is, nor do they understand their own beliefs. Before judging a homosexual for their lifestyle, they should take a good hard look at the New Testament and realize that they are not allowed to hate anyone.

[Kormanthor]

Matthew and Luke are not different Bibles.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

He's about right. No historical document should be believed without other supporting documents.

And there are no other ways for a historical document to be inaccurate than deliberate lying?

[Mhema the Strong]

I don't think it knows everything. Our new technology was not there during the Roman Empire or Christopher Columbus-so how do we know that those things actually happened? If people lie than no documents found can be trusted-right????

The Bible is not a lie. I wish you would realize this.

What is it with you and false dichotomies. Do you honestly think that "It's 100% accurate." and "They lied." are the only options?

You are the one that is saying that the Bible is a complete lie. I am saying that if you can't trust the Bible, how can you be sure about any other documents from long ago? Its either you believe or you don't, I am sick of arguing with you. I know what is right, unfourtantley, you do not.

[Big Jim P]

What is it with you and false dichotomies. Do you honestly think that "It's 100% accurate." and "They lied." are the only options?

He's about right. No historical document should be believed without other supporting documents.

In before someone tries to argue an exception for the bible.

No, that's not right, because the Koran doesn't believe in him being the Christ.

Every argument he has made can be used just as easily to support Islam as it can to support Christianity. All one needs to do is replace every instance of "bible" with "koran". If he doesn't find those arguments a convincing reason to believe in Islam, then there's no reason I should find them a convincing reason to believe in Christianity.

Seriously, I've explained this like four times now. It's not a difficult concept. Why is it so hard for you people to understand?

As I said earlier: Willful ignorance.

[Rafello]

Yeah-people take the time to write something down that is WRONG from w-a-y back then. It wasn't exactly easy to record something. I'm sure if they wrote something down, it was the truth. Religion is not superstition.

So the koran is true as well, right?

Haven't I already answered this?! If you do not believe in my religion, fine, but you don't have to make fun of it-or doubt it-especially when all the facts are there. Koran is different in many cases, and there is SO much more proof than there is of Koran anyways.

Be careful about completely dismissing the Qur'an. It does mention the virgin conception of Christ, after all.

[The Kropotkinite Union]

Matthew and Luke are not different Bibles.

No, but before we attack different Bibles disagreeing with each other, we have to work with the fact that even the same Bible will disagree with itself. There is simply no way of getting around this.

[Fartsniffage]

And there are no other ways for a historical document to be inaccurate than deliberate lying?

There are plenty of ways. But the threshold for belief should be the same, corroborating evidence.

That was why I used the word "about", you should have a little more understanding around qualifying words after your debate with GnI last night.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

You are the one that is saying that the Bible is a complete lie.

You really suck at reading comprehension. I never said it is an absolute lie. I simply question your assertion that it is absolute, unquestioning truth.

I am saying that if you can't trust the Bible, how can you be sure about any other documents from long ago?

Legitimate historians don't trust a single document. They require the agreement between several independent documents to establish that something is likely to have happened or that someone was likely to have actually existed.

I know what is right, unfourtantley, you do not.

You know? That's quite a bold claim.

[Kormanthor]

What is it with you and false dichotomies. Do you honestly think that "It's 100% accurate." and "They lied." are the only options?

He's about right. No historical document should be believed without other supporting documents.

In before someone tries to argue an exception for the bible.

No, that's not right, because the Koran doesn't believe in him being the Christ.

Every argument he has made can be used just as easily to support Islam as it can to support Christianity. All one needs to do is replace every instance of "bible" with "koran". If he doesn't find those arguments a convincing reason to believe in Islam, then there's no reason I should find them a convincing reason to believe in Christianity.

Seriously, I've explained this like four times now. It's not a difficult concept. Why is it so hard for you people to understand?

As I said earlier: Willful ignorance.

I am willing to disbelieve what the Koran teaches, but that won't land me in hell. You can't say the same thing about the Bible.

[Big Jim P]

What is it with you and false dichotomies. Do you honestly think that "It's 100% accurate." and "They lied." are the only options?

He's about right. No historical document should be believed without other supporting documents.

In before someone tries to argue an exception for the bible.

No, that's not right, because the Koran doesn't believe in him being the Christ.

Every argument he has made can be used just as easily to support Islam as it can to support Christianity. All one needs to do is replace every instance of "bible" with "koran". If he doesn't find those arguments a convincing reason to believe in Islam, then there's no reason I should find them a convincing reason to believe in Christianity.

Seriously, I've explained this like four times now. It's not a difficult concept. Why is it so hard for you people to understand?

As I said earlier: Willful ignorance.

I am willing to disbelieve what the Koran teaches, but that won't land me in hell. You can't say the same thing about the Bible.

As Hell does not exist anymore than god does, yes I can.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

I am willing to disbelieve what the Koran teaches, but that won't land me in hell. You can't say the same thing about the Bible.

You know this how? Just saying "I know." isn't good enough, nor is saying "Because the bible says so." How do you know (without resorting to the apeal to authority fallacy) that Christianity is true and Islam isn't?

[Fartsniffage]

I am willing to disbelieve what the Koran teaches, but that won't land me in hell. You can't say the same thing about the Bible.

A muslim, jew, buddhist, hindu, etc. could say the same about the bible.

[Kormanthor]

Matthew and Luke are not different Bibles.

No, but before we attack different Bibles disagreeing with each other, we have to work with the fact that even the same Bible will disagree with itself. There is simply no way of getting around this.

Matthew and Luke are two different men writing about things they saw in their own way. That doesn't mean the Bible is wrong. Maybe you aren't understanding what is truly being said? When I run across things like that I ask the Holy Spirit what the truth is. That is why God sent him to live within believers.