Mass absences break out at London schools as Pride flag flies

[TreeBeard]

3 minutes ago, blackbird said:

NO

So, it’s still ok to kill gay men, as God commanded?

Or, did God command an immoral act (killing) to be done?
 

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Edited May 20, 2023 by TreeBeard

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

Right back at you.  So why should I accept my kids’ public school flying a Pride flag?

Who said you need to? Start your own private schools or home school them - no one's forcing you to send your kids to public school.

[blackbird]

7 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

So, it’s still ok to kill gay men, as God commanded?

Or, did God command an immoral act (killing) to be done?
 

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

I think I already explained that in the past.  Those punishments such as a death sentence in Leviticus were only directed to Israel at that time in history several thousand years ago.  The death sentence for such offences do not apply to Christianity or the Church age.  We live in a different dispensation now, a different age.  Do you recall me telling you this? 

Edited May 20, 2023 by blackbird

[Guest]

1 minute ago, blackbird said:

I think I already explained that in the past.  Those commands in Leviticus were only directed to Israel at that time in history several thousand years ago.  They do not apply to Christianity or the Church.  We live in a different dispensation now, a different age.  Do you recall me telling you this?  

No problem now with gay people?  All in the past?

Got it!  Fly those flags!

[Michael Hardner]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

 no one's forcing you to send your kids to public school.

Or to live in Canada.

 

Maybe Saudi Arabia is a better homeland for your moral hues.

[blackbird]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

No problem now with gay people?  All in the past?

Got it!  Fly those flags!

That's not what I was referring to.  I corrected my post to say the death sentence for those offences does not apply today.  Sodomy is still condemned in the New Testament.

[Guest]

Just now, blackbird said:

That's not what I was referring to.  I corrected my post to say the death sentence for those offences does not apply today.  Sodomy is still condemned in the New Testament.

This stuff just handily coincides with your own views, right?

[TreeBeard]

6 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I think I already explained that in the past.  Those punishments such as a death sentence in Leviticus were only directed to Israel at that time in history several thousand years ago.  The death sentence for such offences do not apply to Christianity or the Church age.  We live in a different dispensation now, a different age.  Do you recall me telling you this? 

So, God changed his mind about killing gay people when it comes to Christians.  God said to the Israelites “kill the gays”, but for the Christians, he changed his mind about it.  

[blackbird]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

This stuff just handily coincides with your own views, right?

No, I am simply telling you what the Bible says.  It's not a matter of personal opinion.  

[Guest]

1 minute ago, blackbird said:

No, I am simply telling you what the Bible says.  It's not a matter of personal opinion.  

But @TreeBeard already told us what the Bible said.  You seemed to disagree. 

Edited May 20, 2023 by bcsapper

[blackbird]

Just now, TreeBeard said:

So, God changed his mind about killing gay people when it comes to Christians.  God said to the Israelites “kill the gays”, but for the Christians, he changed his mind about it.  

Nobody said he "changed his mind about it".  God's plan was obviously that there was to be a death sentence in Israel at that particular period in history, but not in the Church age which began 2,000 years ago.  It is not a matter of God changing his mind.  He doesn't change his mind.  His plan was only for Israel in that period.  Israel was under a covenant with God and a different dispensation.

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

But @TreeBeard already told us what the Bible said.  You seemed to disagree. 

Yes, I disagreed with his interpretation.  I just explained that.

[blackbird]

God has different plans and directives for people in different periods in history.  There were many directives given to Israel in the Old Testament in Leviticus that were only meant for Israel that do not apply today in the Church age.  There were ceremonial laws Israel had to follow as well which do not apply to the Church or Church age.

For example, Israel had to have a priesthood and offer animal sacrifices on the alter.  That was all done away with when Christ was crucified.  There are no more priests offering animal sacrifices or any kind of sacrifices for sin in the New Testament or Church age. (except in Romanism)

Edited May 20, 2023 by blackbird

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Nobody said he "changed his mind about it".  God's plan was obviously that there was to be a death sentence in Israel at that particular period in history, but not in the Church age which began 2,000 years ago.  It is not a matter of God changing his mind.  He doesn't change his mind.  His plan was only for Israel in that period.  Israel was under a covenant with God and a different dispensation.

Yes, I disagreed with his interpretation.  I just explained that.

But he had a quote from the Bible to support his. 

Do you have a quote that supports your position?  Something along the lines of:

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely not fly flags supporting their abomination.

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

 

Do you have a quote that supports your position?   

It's ridiculous to think that we can understand what God thinks. If you need to know exactly what God thinks, the only way is to ask blackbird.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's ridiculous to think that we can understand what God thinks. If you need to know exactly what God thinks, the only way is to ask blackbird.

Blackbird has told me it is so.

And let's face it, he's as good a prophet as anyone else.

Edited May 20, 2023 by bcsapper

[blackbird]

4 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

But he had a quote from the Bible to support his. 

Do you have a quote that supports your position?  Something along the lines of:

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely not fly flags supporting their abomination.

I have to go out in a few minutes.  Will try to answer your question later.  

 

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

Blackbird has told me it is so.

LOL  That is good for a laugh.  I told you before and Michael should pay attention, the Bible is the only rule of faith.  The King James Bible is without error and is absolute truth.

[TreeBeard]

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The King James Bible is without error and is absolute truth.

The KJV says bats are birds.  
 

 

Leviticus 11

13 And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray,

14 And the vulture, and the kite after his kind;

15 Every raven after his kind;

16 And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind,

17 And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl,

18 And the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle,

19 And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.

Edited May 20, 2023 by TreeBeard

[blackbird]

12 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

But he had a quote from the Bible to support his. 

Do you have a quote that supports your position?  Something along the lines of:

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely not fly flags supporting their abomination.

I just said 

"God has different plans and directives for people in different periods in history.  There were many directives given to Israel in the Old Testament in Leviticus that were only meant for Israel that do not apply today in the Church age.  There were ceremonial laws Israel had to follow as well which do not apply to the Church or Church age.

For example, Israel had to have a priesthood and offer animal sacrifices on the alter.  That was all done away with when Christ was crucified.  There are no more priests offering animal sacrifices or any kind of sacrifices for sin in the New Testament or Church age. (except in Romanism)

I will try to explain in more depth later.  Expecting someone to pick me up any moment.

The Bible is divided into the Old Testament and the New Testament for a good reason.  Certain books in the O.T. have directives that were only meant for Israel in that period in history because they had a special covenant relationship with God.   The New Testament describes the Church age which began 2,000 years ago and believers in Christ are not under the O.T. directives given to Israel.

[TreeBeard]

18 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The Bible is divided into the Old Testament and the New Testament for a good reason. 

Yes, because they’re written many centuries apart.  

[Legato]

15 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Yes, because they’re written many centuries apart.  

That's odd, I thought the Old Testament was written by Edgar Allan Poe.

[CdnFox]

20 minutes ago, Legato said:

That's odd, I thought the Old Testament was written by Edgar Allan Poe.

That was thought to be the case at one time, but nevermore.

[herbie]

8 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Your atheism is no less a belief

The entire thread has gone as off topic as you can get, but manages to show how many people, as I pointed out. will turn things absolutely ass backwards trying to make a point. Lacking evidence of an invisible man in the sky that runs everything isn't a belief, belief in one is. Usually described as faith.

[OftenWrong]

What's ridiculous is the group-pile on against someone who's christian by you types who identify yourselves as tolerant progressives. If a muslim man came here to explain their views I'll bet you people couldn't get your stupid mouths open. But then you're all totally full of crap, so maybe you would.

Edited May 20, 2023 by OftenWrong

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

What's ridiculous is the group-pile on against someone who's christian by you types who identify yourselves as tolerant progressives. If a muslim man came here to explain their views I'll bet you people couldn't get your stupid mouths open.

I would.

Edited May 20, 2023 by bcsapper

[OftenWrong]

Just now, bcsapper said:

I would.

Fine. Not a tolerant progressive then I guess.

But then you were raised in GB