Texas Public School Bible Classes Teach Races Come from Noah’s Sons, B

[betsy]

I don't think you have a point here. I don't care if you personally disapprove of homosexual acts, that is your own personal choice. I am simply opposed to the religious fighting to deny them equal rights.

I'm sure you would also oppose adultery, littering and coveting thy neighbours ass. However, we do not deny equal rights to adulterers and those with a hankering for ass. So if my wife should sleep with another man, or woman, I would not approve. However, she should not have to use separate drinking fountains, ride at the back of the bus or be denied the right to marry, adopt children, be listed as the next of kin or share pension income.

You're rambling senselessly. What do you mean you don't care if I disapprove homosexual acts....you brought that subject up, remember??? You know it's not a matter of personal choice, but rather about following our doctrine. Remember?

What nonsense are you spouting about?? Who sez homosexuals had to drink from a different water fountain? Ride at the back of buses? What rubbish literature have you been reading? Who's been filling your head with these nonsense?

Like I said, we view homosexual acts the same way we view adultery. They are both grievous sins, according to our Bible. They are the same.

So how does that make it different in your view?

You ridicule and criticize us for our views on homosexuality. We do not force homosexuals nor adulterers from committing the acts - they have a choice to make. If you are to follow the teachings of Christ, you cannot indulge in those activities.

You think homosexuality is okay, yet you don't approve of your wife committing adultery?

Now tell me, what do you do if your wife persists in bringing home men to have sex with, even though you'd already explained to her that you disapprove of it? Answer!

[GostHacked]

You think homosexuality is okay, yet you don't approve of your wife committing adultery?

It's not adultery if the man and woman both agree and are comfortable with what is happening. Why deny them enjoyment if this is what they want to do? You going to look at them different just because of it?

Now tell me, what do you do if your wife persists in bringing home men to have sex with, even though you'd already explained to her that you disapprove of it? Answer!

I for one, would leave her if I did not approve. Simple as that, life/sh!t happens, move on.

[Mighty AC]

You're rambling senselessly. What do you mean you don't care if I disapprove homosexual acts....you brought that subject up, remember??? You know it's not a matter of personal choice, but rather about following our doctrine. Remember?

Like I said, we view homosexual acts the same way we view adultery. They are both grievous sins, according to our Bible. They are the same. So how does that make it different in your view?

I'll try again. I have no problem with you personally deciding that homosexual acts or adultery is a sin; but, let's not pretend you have no choice in the matter. We've already established that men choose what points of the Bible are doctrine and what can be ignored. So classing homosexual acts as a sin is your choice. The problem I have with various religious sects on this issue is that they are fighting to deny equal rights to homosexuals. On this issue the chosen beliefs of some Christians are being forced on society.

What nonsense are you spouting about?? Who sez homosexuals had to drink from a different water fountain? Ride at the back of buses? What rubbish literature have you been reading? Who's been filling your head with these nonsense?

Sigh....

You ridicule and criticize us for our views on homosexuality. We do not force homosexuals nor adulterers from committing the acts - they have a choice to make. If you are to follow the teachings of Christ, you cannot indulge in those activities.

You think homosexuality is okay, yet you don't approve of your wife committing adultery?

That's right. My wife and I have an understanding that our relationship is monogamous. If either of us should commit adultery then we'd be breaking our own agreement.

Now, here is the part you seem to be missing. I am not part of a group attempting to make adultery illegal or to deny equal rights to adulterers. I do not consider it wrong for others to be poly-amorous, it is their choice. In short, I am not seeking to impose my choice to be in a monogamous relationship on society or deny equal rights to adulterers.

[Peanutbutter]

MightyAC, you're in favor of legal polygamy?

[Mighty AC]

Am I in favour of legal polygamy? Hmmm...good question, I haven't really given it much thought. I don't support the Mormonesque cult groups dominated by abusive old men that are essentially keeping wives captive. However, my opposition is to the abuse, lack of freedom, statutory rape, etc. Provided that all other laws are being met and the participants freely choose to be in that sort of relationship, I see no real problem with multiple wives or husbands.

Edited February 22, 2013 by Mighty AC

[BubberMiley]

Like I said, we view homosexual acts the same way we view adultery. They are both grievous sins, according to our Bible. They are the same.

That's not true at all. Adultery is a sin in the 10 commandments, just like bearing false witness against your neighbour. There is no commandment against homosexuality among the other 8.

Edited February 22, 2013 by BubberMiley

[guyser]

You speak of condoms and pills like as if those are the answers to the problem. Think again!

We've had education. We've had condoms and birth control pills, and iud, etc.....and even came up with the morning-after pills? Have we eliminated AIDS in our own society? Have we seen the last of abortion?

No we have not. Not sure the relevance, but I suspect your answer is mere deflection from the truth. Obfuscation is something that religious people are good at. We have however reduced the instances of new cases greatlyAnd guess what, condoms being handed out freely helped.

You won't solve anything if all you strive to see is the tip of your noses, and refuse to deal with the root cause! The liberal-minded have a problem digging deeper, it seems. You want to have your cake and eat it too!

If there is any stupidity being shown here, it is obvious where it's coming from.

You say, "live and let live." Well thanks to you, the world is doing just that. Therefore, stop your whining and finger-pointing at the Pope. Live with the problem.

The tip of my nose, or yours has no answers.

But in my brain knowing full well what the catholic missionaries espouse, the no condom and abstinence program, they are utter failures. The charities that operate with such stupid and arcane beliefs are causing women and men untold grief.

I suspect you have limited knowledge of such things as truck stops in rural Africa where during rainy season men and truck are holed up for days...what do you think they want to do?

The culture of some parts of Africa believe that sex w a virgin makes one immune from AIDS. So the poor girl gets aids, she of course was warned (as he was) that condoms are a sin.

[betsy]

MightyAC

I'll try again. I have no problem with you personally deciding that homosexual acts or adultery is a sin; but, let's not pretend you have no choice in the matter.

As a Christian, I wouldn't have a choice but to follow the teachings of Christ! If I wish to accept what is forbidden, my choices will be to renounce the teachings of the Bible, and to twist the teachings to suit my views - in other words, become a relativist - or to leave and renounce Christianity.

Get real! You're all over the map!

That kind of relativism, or twisting of the Word of God is what you've been criticizing in the first place! You've been rebuking and mocking us for the Inquisition, for sex-abuse by priests, for all the atrocities done in the name of God and Christianity - which you've called, "EVIL," - yet all those things have been done by either total disregard for the Teachings, or by twisting the Words to suit their intentions!

Mighty AC

We've already established that men choose what points of the Bible are doctrine and what can be ignored. So classing homosexual acts as a sin is your choice.

You don't even know what you're talking about when you spout nonsense about homosexuals being forbidden to drink from the same drinking fountain, or homosexuals being relegated to the back of the bus.....therefore I would ignore any views you give about the Bible! The Bible, of all things - when us Christians need constant study, and to be guided by the Holy Spirit to understand it even more as we progress towards maturity! And by maturity I'm not referring to age - but maturity as a Christian!

So never mind wasting your time talking to me about the Bible. You've got no credibility as far as sensible understanding of it - not even the basics, it's now so obvious!

betsy

What nonsense are you spouting about?? Who sez homosexuals had to drink from a different water fountain? Ride at the back of buses? What rubbish literature have you been reading? Who's been filling your head with these nonsense?

Mighty AC

sigh.

Yes. Sigh....for foolishly spouting rubbish nonsense. For you to even have the courage to post such ridiculous claims speak highly that you don't even understand what it is you're copy-pasting (assuming you got that from somewhere)....therefore, it's only sensible to conclude, what would you know?

Mighty AC

That's right. My wife and I have an understanding that our relationship is monogamous. If either of us should commit adultery then we'd be breaking our own agreement.

Read again. I'm not asking you whether you're breaking your agreement or not - if you've been legally married, of course you'd already entered a contract which according to you includes being monogamous. Therefore it's already established that if one of you commits adultery - you've broken your agreement. You're talking redundantly, and you're not answering the question

I'm asking, what will you do if your spouse insists to commit adultery?

Mighty AC

Now, here is the part you seem to be missing. I am not part of a group attempting to make adultery illegal or to deny equal rights to adulterers. I do not consider it wrong for others to be poly-amorous, it is their choice. In short, I am not seeking to impose my choice to be in a monogamous relationship on society or deny equal rights to adulterers.

And here's the part you can't seem to get - Christians view homosexuality the same way we view adultery.

Becoming a Christian is very much like your marriage....thus Jesus is the Bridegroom of His Church (Christians).

Just like you when you entered into an agreement with your wife, Christians enter into an agreement with God.

Edited February 23, 2013 by betsy

[BubberMiley]

As a Christian, I wouldn't have a choice but to follow the teachings of Christ! If I wish to accept what is forbidden, my choices will be to renounce the teachings of the Bible, and to twist the teachings to suit my views - in other words, become a relativist - or to leave and renounce Christianity.

And yet you are twisting the teachings of Christ to suit your views when you said that adultery is equivalent to homosexuality, when the Bible clearly includes adultery as a sin against the 10 Commandments and does not even mention homosexuality. You try to ignore the fact that you lie about God's words, even when exposed. These are sins as grievous as bearing false witness.

Sometimes I think people are not serious about their Christianity and pursue it only so they can feel superior to others.

Edited February 23, 2013 by BubberMiley

[Mighty AC]

As a Christian, I wouldn't have a choice but to follow the teachings of Christ! If I wish to accept what is forbidden, my choices will be to renounce the teachings of the Bible, and to twist the teachings to suit my views - in other words, become a relativist - or to leave and renounce Christianity.

Christians, including yourself, have chosen to ignore many parts of the Bible. Entire sects of Christianity, like the United Church, do not discriminate against homosexuals. You have a choice in the matter.

You don't even know what you're talking about when you spout nonsense about homosexuals being forbidden to drink from the same drinking fountain, or homosexuals being relegated to the back of the bus...

It was a reference to discrimination not a literal statement. wow.

Read again. I'm not asking you whether you're breaking your agreement or not - if you've been legally married, of course you'd already entered a contract which according to you includes being monogamous.

Marriage doesn't have to include monogamy. For my wife and I it does, but not for everybody.

[betsy]

Somebody here mentioned about some African belief that sex with a virgin makes them immune to AIDS - whether that info is accurate or not, the poster used that to attack the Pope's stance on the use of condoms. Well, first of all - if the man thinks having sex with a virgin makes him immune to AIDS, you think he'll bother with a condom to prevent him from getting AIDS??? Who knows what other beliefs he's got - that perhaps being the first to impregnate a virgin would make him immune to impotency. What a convoluted argument!

Furthermore, that poster should check out his facts. He's either bleating for nothing.....or he insists to continue to use that now-irrelevant argument.

Pope Benedict says that condoms can be used to stop the spread of HIV

Tom Kington in Rome and Ben Quinn

The Observer, Sunday 21 November 2010

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/21/pope-benedict-condoms-hiv-infection

That poster is more likely uninformed that rape is also one reason for the spread of AIDS. That poster can perhaps tell us how a woman about to be raped or gang-raped would go about distributing condoms to each and every rapist in line, and demand that they put those condoms on, or else.....

Btw, I laugh not about the rape....I laugh and shake my head - in stupefied amazement - by the kind of "insight" I get from some "holier-than-thou" new atheist zealots so determined at bashing Christianity.

Edited February 24, 2013 by betsy

[betsy]

Christians, including yourself, have chosen to ignore many parts of the Bible. Entire sects of Christianity, like the United Church, do not discriminate against homosexuals. You have a choice in the matter.It was a reference to discrimination not a literal statement. wow.

Marriage doesn't have to include monogamy. For my wife and I it does, but not for everybody.

Never mind tap-dancing around and bringing up denominational differences. Those - interpretational differences, relativism, etc. - have already been addressed not too long ago when you brought up the "evils" of Christianity - if you still didn't get that, I suggest you backtrack and re-read the previous posts, very carefully. Actually, this is still part of that.....so, focus.

Answer the question: what will you do if your wife insists on committing adultery?

I'm not asking you this question for nothing, Mighty AC.

[betsy]

Somebody here mentioned about some African belief that sex with a virgin makes them immune to sex - whether that info is accurate or not, the poster used that to attack the Pope's stance on the use of condoms. Well, first of all that poster should check out his facts. He's either bleating for nothing.....or he insists to continue to use that now-irrelevant argument.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/21/pope-benedict-condoms-hiv-infection

That poster is more likely uninformed that rape is also one reason for the spread of AIDS. That poster can perhaps tell us how a woman about to be raped or gang-raped would go about distributing condoms to each and every rapist in line, and demand that they put those condoms on, or else.....

Btw, I laugh not about the rape....I laugh and shake my head - in stupefied amazement - by the kind of "insight" I get from some "holier-than-thou" new atheist zealots so determined at bashing Christianity.

Going back to the horrors happening in Africa, which method do you think have a better chance of eventually changing a culture steeped in violence that involves tribal wars/ethnic cleansing, rape and mutilation, and other atrocious acts:

the Christian method (that includes spreading the Word of God and bringing people to Christ)....

.....or simply humanitarian distribution of physical needs such as food, clothings, condoms, medicines etc..?

Think about it.

It won't happen overnight, but hands down, if you truly and sincerely want to see actual change in that part of the world - you better root for Christianity.

Edited February 24, 2013 by betsy

[betsy]

Going back to the horrors happening in Africa, which method do you think have a better chance of eventually changing a culture steeped in violence that involves tribal wars/ethnic cleansing, rape and mutilation, and other atrocious acts:

the Christian method (that includes spreading the Word of God and bringing people to Christ)....

.....or simply humanitarian distribution of physical needs such as food, clothings, medicines etc..?

Think about it.

It won't happen overnight, but hands down, if you truly and sincerely want to see actual change in that part of the world - you better root for Christianity.

Like the changes that's happening in Latin America.

When a hostage is victimized for five gruelling months, and later returns to his captors with the

Gospel, we know God is at work. When a hardened killer trades in his trusted gun for a Bible, we

know God is at work. When a celebrity dancer, immersed in fame, money, drugs, alcohol and sex

gives it all up to volunteer at a missions centre, we know God is at work. These are remarkable

stories, and there are many like them of people who are changing the face of a country, which for

decades has been steeped in poverty, fear and corruption. Colombia, notorious for its drug cartels,

kidnappings, gangs, guerrilla warfare, prostitution and violence, is experiencing an incredible

awakening of the Holy Spirit, even in the most brutal and depraved of hearts.

On Living Truth this week, Charles Price travels into the core of guerrilla territory to a place called

Villa Vicenzia where he is greeted by Russel Stendal, an extraordinary man; pilot, missionary and

survivor of a hostage taking that endured for five horrendous months. The ransom is a major source of

revenue for cash strapped guerrillas. Russel not only survived his ordeal, but turned it around to work

for good. He comes from a family of missionaries and grew up on a Wycliffe Bible Translators

compound, but much of it was destroyed at the height of the guerrilla conflict in the 1980’s.

Today, the remains of the mission base houses a new form of evangelism. Deep inside the Colombian

mountains, the battle for souls is fought by radio stations, operating 24 hours a day, 7 days a week

with airwaves that have a potential of reaching half a million people. It started when Russel was

caught in the middle of a guerrilla struggle and on August 14, 1983, was piloting over the Colombian

jungles and captured by Marxist guerrillas. Five months he was held for ransom and chained to a tree

with a rope around his neck. Knowing his family didn’t have money to pay meant that at any moment

his life could be brutally ended. His response was incredible. He didn’t feel anger or hostility, but saw

his captors bound by poverty, war and a life without God. They were the real prisoners and he prayed

for them, determined that if he was ever to be released, he’d be back to rescue them.

Russel was freed when his captors realized that missionaries don’t have money, and they eventually

settled for half of what it cost for the kidnapping. God’s timing was perfect and He opened a new door

for Russel. His release coincided with the development of a new technology called short wave solar

powered radios. With these hand held devices, Russel had a bold vision to reach Marxist guerrillas,

and he began to transmit and broadcast radio messages into the heart of their territories. These solar

powered radios operate like a digital player and can hold as many as 200 hours of programming.

Suddenly, these same guerrillas were listening to Christian messages and, moved by the Spirit,

became curious to know more of a Gospel they’d never heard before.

For 20 years, Russel developed relationships with guerrilla war leaders, including one who had held

him hostage. He now operates 16 radio stations with a powerful transmitter provided by Peoples

Church in Toronto, and has become well known to many of the leaders on all sides of the conflict.

When he passes through check points, he only has to explain who he is, and takes every opportunity

to hand out Christian books and Bibles. Many have since left their lives of violence and crime to live

a peaceful existence rooted in the Gospel.

Not only have these solar powered radios helped to transform the lives of guerrilla militants, but

they’re making an impact on civilians living in remote mountain villages where there are no radios,

television, internet or cell phones. Neither do they have pastors or Christian leaders and many are

illiterate, but they can listen to these radios that need no electricity, no batteries and will run

indefinitely. Over 100,000 have been deployed, many by parachute, dropped to the ground turned on,

so that people hear them and find them. They go where no missionary can go and are a crucial tool in

a church planting program where life is still primitive, and where the Gospel needs to be heard.

Eber Medina was a young man who didn’t have any perception that human life held value. He grew

up in the crushing poverty of Mizu, a mining town where the precious commodity was emeralds. It

was only a few years ago that people paid with their lives for this much sought after jewel. Bosses and

drug lords controlled the mines, and the region was as deadly above the grounds as below. Eber was

just 12 years old when he began work in the mines and at only 15, was hired by one of Columbia’s

most brutal mine bosses as a body guard. After a mere five days, along with a 17 year old, he was sent

to kill a man, and from there his life descended into a world of crime as dark as the deepest shafts.

Eventually, his reputation preceded him and he became a ruthless mine enforcer, feared by many. He

lived a life filled with violence, weaponry, prostitution, alcohol and drugs.

Years before, Eber tells us a woman came to the mines of Coscues and told him about a man who died

at the cross and that He may have a purpose for his life. He didn’t understand it then, but while lying

low in Bogota after another killing, his family begged him to go to church to hear a visiting American

preacher. That preacher also talked about a man dying on a cross and Eber listened. Everything the

preacher spoke was as if it was directed to him. He stared at his hands and began to weep over all the

widows and kids without fathers he’d left behind. “You think you can forgive me?” he asked of an

unseen God. “You think you can make me a different person?” A voice in his heart answered, “You

didn’t die because you are a courageous man. You are alive because I have a purpose for you.” From

that moment on, Eber knew Jesus had sealed his heart.

The infamous enforcer left his job at the mine and exchanged his gun for a Bible. He grew in his

relationship with Christ and began to preach, but all who knew him were wary. Still fearful, they

listened to him telling them about a God who loves them, and they were amazed. If God could change

Eber’s life, it was certainly possible He would change theirs, and many have now come to the feet of

Christ. The people are embracing Christianity and violence and corruption are on the decline. Instead

of guns, the men are carrying books, bibles and radios that Eber distributes. His dream is to keep

battling for Christ and sharing the Gospel, regardless of consequences to himself.

More....

http://livingtruth.ca/pdf/articles/HLA/HLA_3.pdf Edited February 24, 2013 by betsy

[betsy]

Solar-powered radios - another advanced technology that works for God.

Edited February 24, 2013 by betsy

[g_bambino]

Never mind tap-dancing around and bringing up denominational differences.

Those differences are the proof that you have a choice in what Christian doctorine you follow. The so-called word of God is not monolithic; it is whatever people want it to be. (Either that or God is planting conflicting thoughts in his followers' different heads...)

[ed.: -, +]

Edited February 24, 2013 by g_bambino

[betsy]

Those differences are the proof that you have a choice in what Christian doctorine you follow. The so-called word of God is not monolithic; it is whatever people want it to be. (Either that or God is planting conflicting thoughts in his followers' different heads...)

[ed.: -, +]

KEYWORD: CHRISTIAN

And I guess you're saying that I should follow the doctrine that suits your idea of what a religion ought to be?

Anyway, that's your personal opinion.

Edited February 24, 2013 by betsy

[g_bambino]

And I guess you're saying that I should follow the doctrine that suits your idea of what a religion ought to be?

Anyway, that's your personal opinion.

No, it's your opinion you ascribed to me, as you so freely do with others.

I and MightyAC are saying there is no single Christian doctorine; different Christian demominations recognse and ignore different parts of the Bible and even interpret those they recognise in different ways. That affirms you have a choice of what doctorine to follow, even while legitimately remaining a Christian, and, therefore, you are, contrary to what you said, not bound to believe homosexuality is a sin akin to adultery.

[betsy]

No, it's your opinion you ascribed to me, as you so freely do with others.

I and MightyAC are saying there is no single Christian doctorine; different Christian demominations recognse and ignore different parts of the Bible and even interpret those they recognise in different ways. That affirms you have a choice of what doctorine to follow, even while legitimately remaining a Christian, and, therefore, you are, contrary to what you said, not bound to believe homosexuality is a sin akin to adultery.

Acceptance of homosexuality by some churches happened only in the last few decades or so - due to pressures from the current societal climes, and as means to keep their churches intact - what with threats of split-ups.

You're advocating that just because others had done so, therefore we all should. Just because other churches had decided to veer away from the specific stipulation, therefore it should be an acceptable choice for a Christian to consider. Well, here's an old adage from my grandmother: just because your friend decided to eat poo doesn't mean it's alright to eat it.

No....the Christian God does not bow to the ways of this world. I stand firmly by what I've stated before: To be a Christian is to agree and follow the stipulations of God.

Anyway....I have no wish to argue the doctrine with anyone who has no understanding of it. It's futile.

Edited February 24, 2013 by betsy

[Canuckistani]

Anyway....I have no wish to argue the doctrine with anyone who has no understanding of it. It's futile.

that's a good point. Same as people here arguing evolution with you - you have no understanding of it, it's futile. But who said futulity can't be fun?

Here's a clue tho. Them pointing out doctrinal differences between Christian sects is analgous to you pointing out differences between evolutionists. According to you, it invalidates evolution, so applying the same logic, they've invalidated Christianity. But then applying logic isn't really what this is about, is it?

[g_bambino]

Acceptance of homosexuality by some churches happened only in the last few decades or so...

You're advocating that just because others had done so, therefore we all should.

No....the Christian God does not bow to the ways of this world. I stand firmly by what I've stated before: To be a Christian is to agree and follow the stipulations of God.

That homosexuality has been deemed by some Christian denominations as not a sin only proves my point. In fact, the existence of so many different Christian denominations--Presbyterian, Anglican, Unitarian, Catholic, Evangelical, Calvinist, etc.--proves it even better. So too does the shift in practices within some of the aforementioned. There is no one, universal set of Christian rules or values.

I never once said it should be any different. I, along with Mighty AC, only said you have a choice and explained how that is. You are the one speaking about an absence of choice; there's one god and one set of rules issued by it. Taking that to its logical conclusion, you believe that just because you hold to the dogma of one particular Christian sect, all who call themselves Christians should so as to not be liars. Do you think members of the United Church are real Christians? Is anyone who follows a denomination other than your own?

[ed.: +]

Edited February 24, 2013 by g_bambino

[kimmy]

Imagine if Christians fought against people who work on the Sabbath with the same ferocity they fight against homosexuality.

-k

[Canuckistani]

Imagine if Christians fought against people who work on the Sabbath with the same ferocity they fight against homosexuality.

-k

Or if they really followed Christ's injunction to give away all that they have. Or the one about the mote and log.

[g_bambino]

Them pointing out doctrinal differences between Christian sects is analgous to you pointing out differences between evolutionists. According to you, it invalidates evolution, so applying the same logic, they've invalidated Christianity.

That's along the same lines as her belief that science is sham because scientists don't agree on everything, but science has proven the Bible to be true.

[GostHacked]

No....the Christian God does not bow to the ways of this world. I stand firmly by what I've stated before: To be a Christian is to agree and follow the stipulations of God.

Even the stipulations that contradict other stipulations? Why is it so hard for you to answer that simple question?