Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against ...

Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against Church?

There are 16101 comments on the news.yahoo.com story from Apr 27, 2009, titled Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against Church?. In it, news.yahoo.com reports that:

The trouble they see is not just an America where general support for gay marriage will have driven a wedge between churches and the world, but between churches themselves.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at news.yahoo.com.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#7851 Feb 26, 2013
lilith_Satans_Who_re wrote:
<quoted text>YOu mean your 2000 year old comic book...
Why are you Bible haters obsessed against the Bible? Your fate:

"everlasting fire" "everlasting punishment"

Matthew 25:41-46 (NKJV)
41 Then He will also say to those on the left hand,'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels:

46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#7852 Feb 26, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
I'm not interested in your Satanic advice.
Psalm 1:1 (NKJV)
1 Blessed is the man Who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly,
That is why I am not accepting your counsel sweetie. Despite your insanely zealous beliefs to the contrary, to me you are as far from Godly as a man can get and still have a Bible not burst into flames in his hands from the shame.

By the by sweetie, if I were offering Satanic advice, I'd tell him to take it easy on you when you get there, you really didn't know what you were doing. You just got horribly, horribly lost and didn't realize it.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#7853 Feb 26, 2013
Rainbow Kid wrote:
++++++++++
Matthew 19:12> "For there are some Eunuches, which were so borne from their mothers wombe: and there are some Eunuches, which were made Eunuches of men: and there be Eunuches, which haue made themselues Eunuches for the kingdome of heauens sake. He that is able to receiue it, let him receiue it."
++++++++++
http://www.well.com/user/aquarius/
All of your opinions are based from a "gay perspective". That instantly leads to erroneous thinking mistakes.
Fact #1. There was no such thing as a "gay male" 2000 years ago. So applying the terminology "gay male or homosexual male" is totally, absolutely incorrect thinking.
Two thousand years ago people understood males were attracted to females and vice versa and males were attracted to males and females were attracted to females.
So two thousand years ago, people weren't judged by a sexual orientation as we judge them today. People were judge by their obvious attractions and it was either a right or wrong way of being attracted from one society to the next.
In the Jewish society, preference was given to opposite sex attractions. So as one went through birth and childhood, one was judged according to one's actions, not one's sexual orientation.
At birth, because of certain Mosaic laws dealing with 'birth abnormalities' that would define one as normal or abnormal, babies at birth were inspected thoroughly to see if there were physical defects. A physical defect meant the difference between being accepted into the congregation and being called an out cast.
If a child had missing testicles, they were called a eunuch from birth. They were kept from the congregation as an out cast. If one as an adult were to be physically maimed in the testicles or other area, you could become an out cast quickly from the congregation.
A eunuch (no matter how they became one in childhood or at birth)had a specific job a head of them. They were taught in the art of war through youth. They were also educated in writing and reading.
A eunuch could be the equivalent of a butler, being a guard and caretaker of a wealthy man's family. He could be the guard for a man's concubines and or wives. A eunuch could be used as a scribe and other duties by an employer.
But a eunuch wasn't a gay man as you erringly claim. Why would a gay man who is attracted to other men and enjoys relationships and sex with other men behind closed doors, why would such a man have his testicles whacked off so he would lose his sexual drive?
See, you can't define a baby as being attracted to the same sex or opposite sex, IMPOSSIBLE. And in a society 2000 years ago where a religious society weighed heavily of opposite sex attractions and frowned on same sex attractions, if you grew up being attracted to the same sex you kept your trap shut so you could live long and prosper, faking it that you're attracted to the opposite sex.
The only way a person by Jewish standards could be termed 'a eunuch from his mother's womb' is if he was born without testicles.
And eunuchs MADE eunuchs would be those who were forced to be a eunuch and castrated without choice, whether as a child or as an adult.
And than you have those who wishing to abstain from sexual relations to remain pure before the Lord, Those wishing to be a eunuch for God, they willingly were castrated.
But this modern definition that eunuchs were gay men is a bunch of garbage in most instances. You can't prove a baby is a gay male than or now to claim them a eunuch.
lilith_Satans_Wh o_re

Bellevue, WA

#7854 Feb 26, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you Bible haters obsessed against the Bible? Your fate:
"everlasting fire" "everlasting punishment"
Matthew 25:41-46 (NKJV)
41 Then He will also say to those on the left hand,'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels:
46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
Here let me quote my favorite fairytale sayings

The first little pig built his house out of straw because it was the easiest thing to do.

The second little pig built his house out of sticks. This was a little bit stronger than a straw house.

The third little pig built his house out of bricks.

One night the big bad wolf, who dearly loved to eat fat little piggies, came along and saw the first little pig in his house of straw. He said "Let me in, Let me in, little pig or I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house in!"

"Not by the hair of my chinny chin chin", said the little pig.

But of course the wolf did blow the house in and ate the first little pig.

Wow I love comparative world fairytale class

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#7855 Feb 26, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh no you didn't. Evidence? You are requiring evidence? Tell me something, does that work both ways?
Evidence is always nice to have to prove a point that goes beyond the definition of "an opinion."
Jesus said... "Matthew 19:12> "For there are some Eunuches, which were so borne from their mothers wombe:"
So tell me, in your opinion how would you tell a person was born a eunuch from their mother's womb 2000 years ago?
Show me a sane mind 2000 years ago (no matter their attraction) who liking sex and relationships would set it all a side, claim they were meant to be eunuch since birth and would gladly look forward to having their testicles whacked off. Can you name some one? Can you show evidence of that taking place?
Two thousand years ago in a Jewish society, to reveal that one was attracted to the same sex openly like people do it today could quickly take you to your maker.
Being born a eunuch had little to do with same sex attraction. Especially a decade or more later if such a claim is being made.
Prove other wise if you can.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#7856 Feb 26, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>That is why I am not accepting your counsel sweetie. Despite your insanely zealous beliefs to the contrary, to me you are as far from Godly as a man can get and still have a Bible not burst into flames in his hands from the shame.
By the by sweetie, if I were offering Satanic advice, I'd tell him to take it easy on you when you get there, you really didn't know what you were doing. You just got horribly, horribly lost and didn't realize it.
You would say the same to Jesus. Thank you.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#7857 Feb 26, 2013
lilith_Satans_Who_re wrote:
<quoted text>Here let me quote my favorite fairytale sayings
The first little pig built his house out of straw because it was the easiest thing to do.
The second little pig built his house out of sticks. This was a little bit stronger than a straw house.
The third little pig built his house out of bricks.
One night the big bad wolf, who dearly loved to eat fat little piggies, came along and saw the first little pig in his house of straw. He said "Let me in, Let me in, little pig or I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house in!"
"Not by the hair of my chinny chin chin", said the little pig.
But of course the wolf did blow the house in and ate the first little pig.
Wow I love comparative world fairytale class
Your fate:

Revelation 20:15 (NASB)
15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

Belief in Hell is not required for residency therein.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#7858 Feb 26, 2013
Rainbow Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Your application of 'eunuch' is backwards (tail wagging the dog)
Here'a a little read for you from scholars that have really studied the issue...

http://epistle.us/hbarticles/eunuchs1.html

Still, many Bible scholars believed that because of Deut 23:1, which banned genitally wounded males from taking part in Israel’s worshipping community, castrated males would never have been found in Israel.19 Yet, one must remember how Jeremiah harshly condemned God’s people who had forsaken the Lord to serve foreign gods—and therefore they shall go serve strangers in a foreign land (Jer 5:19). They had stolen and murdered, committed adultery and practiced perjury (7:9), and brought detestable idols into the Temple and sacrificed their children on pagan altars (7:30–31). Because they had not kept the Sabbath, the Lord said he would ‘set Jerusalem afire’(17:27). So, after breaking so many of the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:1–17), what would keep apostate Israelite rulers from disregarding Deut 23:1, if they so chose? Although there is no evidence that Israel castrated her own people, it is likely, as John Taylor and Norman Snaith suggest, that Israelite rulers began importing and using eunuchs in imitation of their powerful neighbors—a general attitude that long characterized Israel (1 Sam 8:5, Deut 17:14–17, Judg 2:10–12, 1 Kings 11:1–3)20—beginning with Jezebel in the northern kingdom of Israel21 and then appearing with the last rulers in the southern kingdom of Judah, in their respective capitals of Samaria and Jerusalem. With regard to the Jews taken into captivity, one must not forget that castrating captives for royal court service was standard practice for their conquering potentates. Most eunuchs, brought to kings as tribute, were war captives or youths who had been kidnapped in slave raids (even in Israel, cf. Joel 3:4–6).22

After studying historical evidence for the extensive and widespread use of eunuchs in harem supervision and other service to kings (e.g., as personal aides, guards, generals, and governors),23 during the Neo-Assyrian (883–609 BC), Neo-Babylonian (626–539 BC) and Achaemenid24 Persian (559–330 BC) empires, which dominated the ancient Near East during the period of the divided Israelite monarchy (Israel and Judah) and then later after they had fallen,

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#7859 Feb 26, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh no you didn't. Evidence? You are requiring evidence? Tell me something, does that work both ways?
Here'a a little read for you from scholars that have really studied the issue...

http://epistle.us/hbarticles/eunuchs1.html

Still, many Bible scholars believed that because of Deut 23:1, which banned genitally wounded males from taking part in Israel’s worshipping community, castrated males would never have been found in Israel.19 Yet, one must remember how Jeremiah harshly condemned God’s people who had forsaken the Lord to serve foreign gods—and therefore they shall go serve strangers in a foreign land (Jer 5:19). They had stolen and murdered, committed adultery and practiced perjury (7:9), and brought detestable idols into the Temple and sacrificed their children on pagan altars (7:30–31). Because they had not kept the Sabbath, the Lord said he would ‘set Jerusalem afire’(17:27). So, after breaking so many of the Ten Commandments (Exod 20:1–17), what would keep apostate Israelite rulers from disregarding Deut 23:1, if they so chose? Although there is no evidence that Israel castrated her own people, it is likely, as John Taylor and Norman Snaith suggest, that Israelite rulers began importing and using eunuchs in imitation of their powerful neighbors—a general attitude that long characterized Israel (1 Sam 8:5, Deut 17:14–17, Judg 2:10–12, 1 Kings 11:1–3)20—beginning with Jezebel in the northern kingdom of Israel21 and then appearing with the last rulers in the southern kingdom of Judah, in their respective capitals of Samaria and Jerusalem. With regard to the Jews taken into captivity, one must not forget that castrating captives for royal court service was standard practice for their conquering potentates. Most eunuchs, brought to kings as tribute, were war captives or youths who had been kidnapped in slave raids (even in Israel, cf. Joel 3:4–6).22

After studying historical evidence for the extensive and widespread use of eunuchs in harem supervision and other service to kings (e.g., as personal aides, guards, generals, and governors),23 during the Neo-Assyrian (883–609 BC), Neo-Babylonian (626–539 BC) and Achaemenid24 Persian (559–330 BC) empires, which dominated the ancient Near East during the period of the divided Israelite monarchy (Israel and Judah) and then later after they had fallen,
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#7860 Feb 26, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
The clock is ticking. Your life is going down the drain. You will soon lose everything. Who's 'stupid'?
Oh hear it comes.... the ol' tent revivalist guilt trip. Honey, that shit closes out-of-town. That shit only works on fear-based people like you.
Thinking

Gillingham, UK

#7861 Feb 26, 2013
Stove burner? Are you from the 19th century?
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
He's good to those who repent. Not those like you who mock Him. You can't even imagine what God has planned for you. For starters turn on your stove burner and place your hand over it.
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#7862 Feb 26, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not difficult to see why God created Hell.
You've seen it, have you? Interesting....

Do you hear voices, too?

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#7864 Feb 26, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh hear it comes.... the ol' tent revivalist guilt trip. Honey, that shit closes out-of-town. That shit only works on fear-based people like you.
Yes, it does have to do with fear.

Hebrews 10:31 (NASB)
31 It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#7865 Feb 26, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
You've seen it, have you? Interesting....
Do you hear voices, too?
Illiterate?

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#7867 Feb 26, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a tough one to define "eunuch by birth". Even Jesus didn't define or elaborate how one could be said to be a "eunuch by birth." It would be easier to grow up attracted to one's own sex 2000 years ago than to be define as a "eunuch by birth".
Being a eunuch by birth can only be defined at two times: A..years after birth or B..at birth.
A. scenario would happen if after several years of growth, adults knowing the male child notice the child has shown same sex attractions and or shown no interest in girls. Than an adult would claim "this male child has been a eunuch by birth" and then I would suspect would be trained to be a eunuch after castration.
B. scenario would happen if the new born male was seen to have no testicles or just a single testicle. If no testicles, the male child would be said to be a "eunuch by birth". If a single testicle was noted, I'm sure the adults concerned would have given sometime to see if the second would appear. If not, the single testicle would be castrated and it would be said the male child was a "eunuch by birth".
My point being is that a person can't be said to have been a "eunuch by birth" unless there is evidence. And for an adult with same sex attractions and two testicles 2000 years ago, never acting as a eunuch who steps forward to claim they were a eunuch by birth, that isn't evidence. That's a claim.
Eunuchs were castrated at birth in needed situations or, later in life by themselves in want to be a eunuch or being forced to be a eunuch by a captor.
What??? I never said anything about castration. In fact, the Bible shows that these eunuchs by birth could OT have been castrated or otherwise deficient, testicle-wise, as indicated by Deuteronomy 23:1, which forbids any man who is wounded in the stones from being part of the congregation.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#7868 Feb 26, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
Hell is more important. After all it will be your eternal home, with Satan and his evil angels. You'll have a VERY long time to remember that some cared enough to warn you, while they abuse you.
How can an adult believe that crap? There is absolutely no evidence at all that any of it is true!
Come on, prove me wrong, provide some evidence either Satan, hell or angels exist. I live in the smegging City of Angels, and I've never seen one.
And since there is no evidence at all these things exist, why should I believe they do?

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#7869 Feb 26, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
He's "big enough" that He doesn't have to take it. I.E. Judgment Day. He is letting your sins pile high. Then He's going to burn you forever. Be patient. The time is rapidly approaching. Everyone will know all you have said about God.
Revelation 20:12-15 (NASB)
12 And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. 13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
I hacked the book of life and put my name in it.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#7870 Feb 26, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a Hebrew expert? Nah. You're just another of Satan's liars aiding gays to the eternal fire with yourself.
Compared to you, I suppose that I am an expert. Do you know ANY Hebrew? You CANNOT understand the true meaning of the Bible without it. There is NO English translation that does not contain errors.

Now I will freely admit that there are plenty of people who know Hebrew better than I do: I occasionally ask one or two of them in particular for aid in translation if I can't use various on-line or hard copy resources to work through it on my own.

Do you speak and/or read ANY other language? I am betting no, you are too ignorant of the difficulties of translation to have any clue about the relationships between languages.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#7871 Feb 26, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
Your fate:
Revelation 20:15 (NASB)
15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
Belief in Hell is not required for residency therein.
But the existence of Hell is, and since there isn't any evidence of Hell's existence, why worry about it?

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#7872 Feb 26, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a consistent liar.
I never lie. It is FAR too much fun posting only the pure truth.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 3 min Frankie Rizzo 15,051
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 7 min SCRODOM 68,806
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 11 min Grey Box 273 38,680
Retaliation Thread 15 min Delbert 2
News Gay Officer Wounded in Dallas Shooting Faces Le... 16 min Delbert 2
pokemon 24 min Bernie 1
News US Navy ship to be named after late gay rights ... 37 min Delroy 9
News Austin Loses 'A Safe Space for Gay Men to Go Ha... 44 min johnson1 29
More from around the web