Surpeme Court Gay Marriage Cases....

[Ben Kenobi]

The Bible was written for other generations. That doesn't mean it isn't helpful, but some of it just isn't relevant to us. Can you see that?

That's been said before - but not by you.

“You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

This is no different. God says, "don't do this". The prophet Kidicious says - "no, that's not relevant to us, you can safely ignore what God has to say".

So who will you follow? Christ, or the prophet Kidicious? Who has the way of life, and who has the way of destruction?

[kentonio]

I'm quite liking the Prophet Kid personally. :desire:

[Ninot]

Ben: Do you have any homosexual friends? And if so, how do you interact with them?

I'm not a Christian, however if I was, and I was devout (with exception to homosexuality), and ended up at the Pearly Gates, I'd give them an earful if they said I couldn't be accepted into Heaven because I loved all my friends, even if they loved each other a little more than scripture is interpreted as saying they should.

[DinoDoc]

The Bible was written for other generations. That doesn't mean it isn't helpful, but some of it just isn't relevant to us. Can you see that?

Yes, you're a Cafeteria Christian.

[Imran Siddiqui]

While the books were widely accepted

That was my original point.

Actually, just the contrary. There are sources in the Vulgate that we don't currently possess for which the Vulgate is actually the most accurate, and surperior to say Vaticanus. I would argue based on the extant evidence that the early Vulgates are actually the best sources extant. Vaticanus is great but it doesn't have all the books.

Which is why later Greek manuscripts are used to make up the difference. Codex Vaticanus being the best available source for what it does have, NT wise (Dead Sea Scrolls being best for OT wise).

Here's a question. Which was published first - the Douay Rheims or the KJV.

You realize that the King James Version wasn't the first Protestant Bible in English, right? There was this guy named Tyndale whom you may have heard of?

That scripture is Authoritative? The authority the Creeds possess derives from the Magisterium. The magisterium affirms that Scripture is authoritative. You yourself just quoted Athanasius who affirms the present list of books.

Didn't say that. But it does mean that you are accepting that the Magisterium is authoritative and that part of their authority includes affirmation that Scripture itself is authoritative. It all fits together. Part of their teaching and interpretative authority.

And this is where the problem with you asserting that you used to be Protestant manifests itself... because you have no idea how to think Protestant-ly anymore. The idea that if one accepts one thing the "Magisterium" approved means you approve all just doesn't even factor in the Protestant mindset. The word Protestant was a slur attached to those who rejected the "Magisterium", remember?

The Creed is held onto due to the long standing tradition and that it still seems to be a good summation of the Faith. There are Protestant churches, as mentioned, who don't think so and therefore reject the Creed, but hold onto other traditional things (like, say, Communion)

Luther teaches what the Catholic church teaches on grace.

Definitely not at time, or have you forgotten plenary indulgences so quickly? And I am pleased to see that the Catholic Church does not consider works to be necessary for salvation . Or is that not what you meant? Luther's teaching on grace is that salvation is solely by grace and not works (the term "works righteousness" as a pejorative comes from Luther, IIRC).

Yes, actually they do. In terms of the Canon, yes, yes they do. It was decided some 1100 years prior to Luther.

Sorry, but a whole host of folks disagreed, starting in 1517. And the most popular Bibles sold today (the NIV, KJV) have a different OT canon than the accepted Catholic one. So, decision overruled.

Esau sold his birthright for a meal. What did God say to Esau? Did he let Esau come back? No, no he didn't. Those who have wilfully chosen to divide the body and remain out of communion cannot claim to be part of the same tradition. They themselves have rejected it.

You realize Esau and Jacob reconcile?

Also saying that you are akin to the trickster who stole the birthright from his old, addled father isn't exactly a compliment .

As of quite recently. Which is why, as I said, the actual Lutherans say that they do not affirm apostolic succession.

Its funny you are deciding what "actual Lutherans" say... now try to explain away why Scandinavian Lutherans (including the Lutheran Church in Sweden and Finland) claim apostolic succession.

I would argue that ELCA is simply another branch of Anglicanism. They themselves have converted en masse.

You know except for the theological differences (free will vs. single predestination being only one)

[MichaeltheGreat]

Good luck with telling God that homosexuality is a-ok and all that 'abomination' stuff is mere rubbish that can be safely ignored.

It's easy to tell God whatever you want, since it's just your own imagination and a clinging to what some people find a comforting thought, that "Big Daddy" put it all together and makes everything happen for a reason.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yes, you're a Cafeteria Christian.

Everyone is in some respect or another.

[kentonio]

It's easy to tell God whatever you want, since it's just your own imagination and a clinging to what some people find a comforting thought, that "Big Daddy" put it all together and makes everything happen for a reason.

Damnit, wish I had a thank left.

[MichaeltheGreat]

That's why I'm an adherent of the Church of Dog, though. You can't lie to Dog.



Well, you probably could, but Dog would know. And would love you regardless.

[MRT144]

Dog eats its own ****. No sale MTG

[Sava]

What do you think 'be united', means Sava?

Jesus was quite clear on what actions in life will prevent a person from entering the kingdom of heaven. He made no mention of homosexuality being one of them.

What is especially hilarious about your beliefs is that you side with the Republicans on economic issues... almost entirely in opposition to Christ's teachings. Jesus made it a point to say rich people can't go to heaven. Jesus didn't say anything about teh gays. Again, your ass backwards priorities reveal your hatred and bigotry.

Your purposeful perversion of the Bible for your own selfish, hateful reasons is what makes you a fundamentalist... a heretic... and probably headed for the lake of fire. It's not my place to say so. I'm just trying to help you find the right path.

In the end, it's your soul. You can continue to side with Satan and his child raping cult church... or you can go with God.

[Kidlicious]

Yes, you're a Cafeteria Christian.

Look at the history of Christianity and how the church has changed as the world has changed.

[Kidlicious]

God is pretty clear about that.

God is not clear about anything. You've got to have the balls to say that.

You've already said that sin is righteous, so I'm not really sure you even understand what the commandments are, but hey.

It's your life.

Good luck with telling God that homosexuality is a-ok and all that 'abomination' stuff is mere rubbish that can be safely ignored.

We all have to live our lives before God. Worry about yourself.

[Kidlicious]

That's been said before - but not by you.



This is no different. God says, "don't do this". The prophet Kidicious says - "no, that's not relevant to us, you can safely ignore what God has to say".

So who will you follow? Christ, or the prophet Kidicious? Who has the way of life, and who has the way of destruction?

I'm not telling people to have sex. Whatever point DinoDoc is trying to make, he is unfortunate that you are on the same team, as usual. Any one on this site is always unfortunate to have you on their team.

[MRT144]

Why does Ben read like a Chick tract?