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.

Brian

Houston, TX

#8001 Feb 28, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
Gays will care when they stand before God.
There is NO God. Grow up!

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#8002 Feb 28, 2013
The title of this thread is Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against Church?
I think that churches, and the people within these churches, have been 'pitted against' one another for a long time.
I randomly choose a link this morning about this subject and came up with this link:
http://juicyecumenism.com/tag/forward-in-fait...

Just scanning through the article, I saw that:
"One student in the audience mentioned the difficulty in finding a good church that provides Anglican sacramental ministry at college. Nelson reported that student groups can become parishes."
“spiritual birth defects” in his congregants, which came from “the weird way they’ve been discipled.”
" a deep yearning for the reunification of Christ’s church"

The list is endless as to how/why/when the 'church' has become pitted against one another.
Just about every time I go somewhere, I see yet another little church has sprung up. And, the first thing I do is double check to see what name this one has chosen for itself. I have seen some doozies.
And, IMO, each one will have the idea that "ah, FINALLY, we have got it right".

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#8003 Feb 28, 2013
Ashton wrote:
Hick, you KNOW well enough that you are an enemy of God.
Yes dear, I am aware that I am an enemy of your anti-Semitic, pretty White boy, blue-eyed Jesus with the fabulous blond highlights that you are so obsessed with. But unlike you, I don't recognize the beast you worship as a God, let alone believe in it as the only one there is.
Ashton wrote:
WHERE do you think THAT is going, Hick????
ANYPLACE you won't be will be heaven, cupcake.,
Ashton wrote:
God repeatedly commands against your homosexual lifestyle choice.
That's sweet of him dear, but that's your problem, not mine.
Serious Replies Only

New York, NY

#8004 Feb 28, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you're telling us that everybody who sexually abuses children is a homosexual? REALLY? That's odd, because the vast majority of the people who sexually abuse children identify as heterosexual.
No, but you just did. REALLY!

“Mystical Atheism for everyone!”

Since: Nov 08

El Cerrito California

#8006 Feb 28, 2013
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.
Your psycho god is imaginary.

Here is what Jesus had to say about his GOD that you reject in preference to your false god of hellfire created for you by the Romans:

Luke 6:27-36 (King James Version)

"27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,

28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.

29 And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also.

30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.

31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.

33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.

34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.

35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.

36 Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful."

Merciful. Perhaps you should look this word up in the dictionary, dollarsbill.

I suspect that your hate of your brothers and sisters who object to your false god of hellfire has clouded your brain and bricked off your heart.

LOVE is the message of the Jewish Jesus and this LOVE is GOD:

1 John 4:8 (King James Version)
"8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love."

Reach out to the true GOD, dollarsbill before your hatred of your fellow human beings gives you a fatal stroke.

Hate is not healthy and prevents you from recognizing the GOD that Jesus taught is LOVE!

We all need to get informed as to the evil nature of the Roman hoax of Christianity and it's many derivatives that deny the Jewish GOD and the Jewish Jesus and get involved in restoring true Christianity based on the OMNIPRESENT GOD of Israel to humanity that is even now being found to be in accord with the latest scientific findings concerning the nature of the Cosmos!

GOD is LOVE. WE are ALL ONE WITH GOD, even the unloving!

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#8007 Feb 28, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Well from what I read, it's tough to decided which came first: Warfare/punishment castration or castration foe eunuchs. I would guess a bit of both.
Castration goes back easily to 2000 BCE. Even the OT mentions it to about the same period.
Castration was used for ancient 'sex crimes' From China to Africa. But castration was used in warfare to take 'power' from an enemy and, to keep the enemy from producing any more off spring. In war fare castration like the cutting off of ears, modern scalping and such proved how many of the enemy were killed/wounded/taken.
I knew that non-castrated males were used as eunuchs. But I always had a problem with the statement "Eunuchs in the Bible were gay males."
As an absolute, blanket statement, I would agree. From context and from a close look at the cultural factors involved, I would agree that at least some of the eunuchs were castrated men. Some, but not all. Remember the Isaiah passage, and how it is in sharp contrast to Deuteronomy.
No Surprise wrote:
Well I considered that statement as if I was a wealthy man in ancient Israel and I needed a eunuch to guard my wives. So my question would be how could I be sure a male was an actual eunuch that wouldn't be trying to ride my wives while he guarded them?
...
<edited for space>

...I ask you to pretend your a wealthy man with wives in the same scenario with the same men and tell which man you would hire and why. By the way, your not Jewish.
Correct, I am not Jewish. And what makes you think that I need to pretend to be a wealthy man?

As to the question at hand, I'd rather just hire a few Amazons for the job. End of problem. More seriously, it comes down to a question of buying slaves vs hiring trustworth men. If there was a born eunuch from a reputable family, he would be my choice over anyone bought to me by a slave dealer.

Did you ever see the movie "History of the World, Part 1" by Mel Brooks? There is a scene in it where an excaping slave is trying to hide among some (castrated) eunuchs, with the aid of the women. The suspicious guard demands a test: an erotic dance by a very atractive woman. The castratos stand there passively, virtually ignoring the dance. The escapee is sweating and desperately trying to not react until finally, the fact that he is an intact srtaight man becomes, shall we saw... obvious to all.

I don't see why anyone in the distant past could not have used similar methods as a test of applicants for the position of harem eunuch.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#8008 Feb 28, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
"Living Water" (Mayim Chaim) was the water drawn from the Pool of Bethesda with a silver ewer, and carried in procession up to the temple to sanctify the water in the Brazen Sea, and used to ritually purify all the implements of sacrifice and offering.
Prior to the ascendency of the temple cult and Sadducess, each tribe had their own places of sacrifice. In fact, anyone could build an altar of living (unhewn) stones and make offerings and prayers to the Father. The rise of the Temple cult brought this individual and tribal freedom and autonomy to an end. It was worse for those northern mixed-breed Samaritans who did not experience the exile. They became increasingly marginalized.
The Temple cultists increasingly taught that the only way to reach the Father was through them. THEY had the correct rituals, the temple and the unique ability to do the necessary purification that would make any offerings and prayers acceptable before God. They had the Mayim Chaim, the Living Water necessary to purify an altar. Any who could not afford their services could not even be free of their sins at Yom Kippur.
The Pharisee synagogue cult had economic and social standing ... and, of course, their rules and books and private purification baths. Any who didn't come from the right families, or follow their rules and observances also couldn't hope to be heard by God.
What Yeshua told the woman at the well was that she could have springs of Mayim Chaim welling up within her, eternally purifying her and making her prayers acceptable before the Father, no matter where she was, AND withOUT the approval of any priests or book-worshipping rule mongers.
In this, Yeshua was completely subverting the temple and the entire unjust social structure of the time.
A bit more than your average "water mythology", I'd say. lol
Persuant to a comment from several days ago, I am STILL looking for anything that mandated a switch from those tribal alters to the single alter at Jerusalem. I can't find any justification in the Torah, Kings, or Chronicles. Currently, I am looking throught the prophets to find anything that (other than power politics) that would forbid the establishment of tribal alters.

Certainly, Ezekiel (and others) say that the Messiah will reestablish the Temple - one of the proofs that Jesus was not the Messiah - and it is reasonable to point out that the tribal alters in the kingdom of Israel fell into apostacy (repeatedly!) making it desierable to have only the one Temple. But as a Divine commandment? I don't know...

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#8009 Feb 28, 2013
snyper wrote:
By the way, see any similarity between the religious sociual structures of that time and the Roman/Orthodox priestcraft and protestant book slinging of today?
For those who know the Judaism of the time, this story and many others have a richness, beauty and hope that far exceeds the understanding of gentile christendom.
Funny thing, I just started reading a book called "The Misunderstood Jew", written by a Jewish author who points out that both Christians and Jews would benefit from an improved understanding of the esential Jewishness of Jesus - the context in which he lived and taught.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#8010 Feb 28, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed! Myth can be very complex. Don't you think there is some reason behind ritual purification and sacrifice? For example, man reached a point in development when he questioned his relationship to the other living creatures. He understood that he lived by taking the lives of other sentient beings or plants. He also could see other creatures doing the same thing. His world was small, so when he experienced powerful forces well beyond his own powers, he assumed a divinity of some kind which must be in some kind of relationship. Therefore, he offered up sacrifice to this unseen entity and ritual purification included water which also was essential to his life in the world. Thus ritualistic cleansing and sacrifices took place across cultures.
Some cultures made it clear that the Gods ate and drank the fruits of sacrifice, the smoke from the alter was what gave them sustenance.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#8011 Feb 28, 2013
Grandpasmurf952 wrote:
<quoted text>
Your psycho god is imaginary.
Here is what Jesus had to say about his GOD that you reject in preference to your false god of hellfire created for you by the Romans:
Luke 6:27-36 (King James Version)
"27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.
29 And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also.
30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.
31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.
32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.
33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.
34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.
35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.
36 Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful."
Merciful. Perhaps you should look this word up in the dictionary, dollarsbill.
I suspect that your hate of your brothers and sisters who object to your false god of hellfire has clouded your brain and bricked off your heart.
LOVE is the message of the Jewish Jesus and this LOVE is GOD:
1 John 4:8 (King James Version)
"8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love."
Reach out to the true GOD, dollarsbill before your hatred of your fellow human beings gives you a fatal stroke.
Hate is not healthy and prevents you from recognizing the GOD that Jesus taught is LOVE!
We all need to get informed as to the evil nature of the Roman hoax of Christianity and it's many derivatives that deny the Jewish GOD and the Jewish Jesus and get involved in restoring true Christianity based on the OMNIPRESENT GOD of Israel to humanity that is even now being found to be in accord with the latest scientific findings concerning the nature of the Cosmos!
GOD is LOVE. WE are ALL ONE WITH GOD, even the unloving!
Considering all the enemies we have, even just here on Topix, methinks your god is asking a bit much of us in the "forgiving" department.:)

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#8012 Feb 28, 2013
Nettiebelle wrote:
The title of this thread is Will Gay Marriage Pit Church Against Church?
I think that churches, and the people within these churches, have been 'pitted against' one another for a long time.
I randomly choose a link this morning about this subject and came up with this link:
http://juicyecumenism.com/tag/forward-in-fait...
Just scanning through the article, I saw that:
"One student in the audience mentioned the difficulty in finding a good church that provides Anglican sacramental ministry at college. Nelson reported that student groups can become parishes."
“spiritual birth defects” in his congregants, which came from “the weird way they’ve been discipled.”
" a deep yearning for the reunification of Christ’s church"
The list is endless as to how/why/when the 'church' has become pitted against one another.
Just about every time I go somewhere, I see yet another little church has sprung up. And, the first thing I do is double check to see what name this one has chosen for itself. I have seen some doozies.
And, IMO, each one will have the idea that "ah, FINALLY, we have got it right".
Thank Irenaeus. It's intrinsic to his concept of "orthodoxy".

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#8013 Feb 28, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
Persuant to a comment from several days ago, I am STILL looking for anything that mandated a switch from those tribal alters to the single alter at Jerusalem. I can't find any justification in the Torah, Kings, or Chronicles. Currently, I am looking throught the prophets to find anything that (other than power politics) that would forbid the establishment of tribal alters.
Certainly, Ezekiel (and others) say that the Messiah will reestablish the Temple - one of the proofs that Jesus was not the Messiah - and it is reasonable to point out that the tribal alters in the kingdom of Israel fell into apostacy (repeatedly!) making it desierable to have only the one Temple. But as a Divine commandment? I don't know...
Solomonic federalism?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#8014 Feb 28, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny thing, I just started reading a book called "The Misunderstood Jew", written by a Jewish author who points out that both Christians and Jews would benefit from an improved understanding of the esential Jewishness of Jesus - the context in which he lived and taught.
I agree wholeheartedly. It would place his sayings in the correct context.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#8015 Feb 28, 2013
RalphB wrote:
<quoted text>
Considering all the enemies we have, even just here on Topix, methinks your god is asking a bit much of us in the "forgiving" department.:)
No pain, no gain.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#8016 Feb 28, 2013
Liam R wrote:
Correct, I am not Jewish. And what makes you think that I need to pretend to be a wealthy man?
As to the question at hand, I'd rather just hire a few Amazons for the job. End of problem. More seriously, it comes down to a question of buying slaves vs hiring trustworth men. If there was a born eunuch from a reputable family, he would be my choice over anyone bought to me by a slave dealer.
Did you ever see the movie "History of the World, Part 1" by Mel Brooks? There is a scene in it where an excaping slave is trying to hide among some (castrated) eunuchs, with the aid of the women. The suspicious guard demands a test: an erotic dance by a very atractive woman. The castratos stand there passively, virtually ignoring the dance. The escapee is sweating and desperately trying to not react until finally, the fact that he is an intact srtaight man becomes, shall we saw... obvious to all.
I don't see why anyone in the distant past could not have used similar methods as a test of applicants for the position of harem eunuch.
Actually I did see that movie lol.
I wasn't saying you're not Jewish as a statement. I was saying pretend your not Jewish 2000 years ago but are a wealthy man looking for a eunuch.
See, if you are Jew and looking for a eunuch, you would have to go by Mosaic standards if you were an 'active' follower of that faith. In hiring a eunuch, there would be some things that the Mosaic law would prevent you from using to see what 'type' of a eunuch you were hiring. Like sex tests. Or purposeful arousal by what ever means.
So if you were a wealthy Mosaic active Jewish Male with five wives, how would you hire a eunuch to protect your wives while having faith that the eunuch wouldn't seduce your wives? The chance of finding a Jewish family who had a son that turned himself into a eunuch would be hard to locate in that time period, especially when the sons and daughters of Jewish parents were being urged to marry and have children to carry on the family lineage. Than you have the fact (like now) not all homosexual males 2000 years ago are going to gladly accept a life as a Jewish Mosaic abiding eunuch. They knew what we know. You can have your cake and ice cream to if your careful. They would learn it was more profitable to be a married Jewish male with secret same sex affairs than to become a Jewish eunuch where having sexual relations as a Jewish eunuch might create problems.
But if you're wealthy and not Jewish 2000 years ago, you could use any means you could think of to prove to yourself how non attracted to your wives a eunuch would be. You could use females and males to tempt them to arousal if need be. But a devout Jewish man would by logic not use those means to prove the arousal capabilities of a eunuch. He would be as you stated it, wholly dependent upon what others said and nothing more.
Snerdly Whiplash

Clearlake, CA

#8017 Feb 28, 2013
RalphB wrote:
<quoted text>
Considering all the enemies we have, even just here on Topix, methinks your god is asking a bit much of us in the "forgiving" department.:)
well, it takes practice. That's what we are here for :)

Over the centuries men have constructed various gods. All of these gods have one thing in common. They only posses what man can conceive.

And since we are created in the OMNIPRESENT GOD'S image, there is a lot of potential we have that we are unable to currently conceive anymore than we can conceive of the qualities of the OMNIPRESENT GOD. We can only honestly say about GOD and about ourselves, what is, is.

But by utilizing all of what is, I don't think forgiving our neighbors is as big of a task as it appears to be with our currently limited vision.

One big step for me was to learn to recognize that evil is a disease, not a lifestyle choice.
Snerdly Whiplash

Clearlake, CA

#8018 Feb 28, 2013
The first post was sent by accident. I didn't realize it was accepted because it did not show up. So I continued to tweak it here and there and than dispatched it. Ignore the first one.

sorry.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#8019 Feb 28, 2013
Snerdly Whiplash wrote:
The first post was sent by accident. I didn't realize it was accepted because it did not show up. So I continued to tweak it here and there and than dispatched it. Ignore the first one.
sorry.
Sometimes TOPIX ssttuutteerrss.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#8020 Feb 28, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I did see that movie lol.
...
And I am having SUCH a hard time stopping myself from quoting the racist line used in that scene...

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#8021 Feb 28, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I did see that movie lol.
I wasn't saying you're not Jewish as a statement. I was saying pretend your not Jewish 2000 years ago but are a wealthy man looking for a eunuch.
See, if you are Jew and looking for a eunuch, you would have to go by Mosaic standards if you were an 'active' follower of that faith. In hiring a eunuch, there would be some things that the Mosaic law would prevent you from using to see what 'type' of a eunuch you were hiring. Like sex tests. Or purposeful arousal by what ever means.
So if you were a wealthy Mosaic active Jewish Male with five wives, how would you hire a eunuch to protect your wives while having faith that the eunuch wouldn't seduce your wives? The chance of finding a Jewish family who had a son that turned himself into a eunuch would be hard to locate in that time period, especially when the sons and daughters of Jewish parents were being urged to marry and have children to carry on the family lineage. Than you have the fact (like now) not all homosexual males 2000 years ago are going to gladly accept a life as a Jewish Mosaic abiding eunuch. They knew what we know. You can have your cake and ice cream to if your careful. They would learn it was more profitable to be a married Jewish male with secret same sex affairs than to become a Jewish eunuch where having sexual relations as a Jewish eunuch might create problems.
But if you're wealthy and not Jewish 2000 years ago, you could use any means you could think of to prove to yourself how non attracted to your wives a eunuch would be. You could use females and males to tempt them to arousal if need be. But a devout Jewish man would by logic not use those means to prove the arousal capabilities of a eunuch. He would be as you stated it, wholly dependent upon what others said and nothing more.
Even the born eunuch would have been encouraged to marry, but to what point? If we are talking about an absolute, 100% pure homosexual with no interest in women, and no ability to "fake" that interest, then he would end up being shamed when he was denounced by his still virgin wife. I have not yet done the research as to the custom waaaayyyy back when, but for a long time, a Jewish woman has been able to divorce her husband for non-performance. IF that interpretation of law goes back far enough, then that would have been incentive for a born eunuch to not give in to parental pressure to wed.

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.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
If the Bible is True Barnsweb is a ... 2 min Barnsweb 29
News Religion, higher education and critical thinking (Aug '15) 2 min KAB 8,224
+++++++++++ THE SECRET to IMMORTALITY +++++++++++ (Nov '14) 56 min TheLordsAnointed 15
GS, defend this defamation of my character with... (Oct '12) 1 hr Judgment Day Watc... 967
Why do you really believe in a god? 1 hr Gary Coaldigger 604
Let's have a discussion, HG. (Oct '12) 1 hr Judgment Day Watc... 175
Evidence Against God 3 hr Doubting Thomas 3,787
Scientific Proof Of GOD(for dummies) 4 hr Atheistgirl 1,327
More from around the web