Do Homosexuals Think They Can Get a Free Pass from God?

Yes I remember the account of the sun stopping in the sky. And that really did happen. Now,whether the earth is what stopped in reality, doesn't matter. It was a great miracle by God. God proabably stopped the whole movement of the universe in order to accomplish this. A great miracle indeed.

Quantrill

 

Much of what you believe is simply an expression of your faith, and not an argument of fact. That's fine, and I have no desire to undermine it. But since we know the documents used to create the KJV and the NIV differ, it is fairly certain that what Jesus was reading before any of the documents used to create either translation had been created was certainly different still.
Your statement of the accuracy of translation over millenia is a statement of faith, not fact. It is what you want to be so, but you have no way of supporting the claim. History provides you with no evidence, so you are left only with a faith based argument. Just understand that those that don't share your faith will give it no weight.

 

Yours is a statement of faith, not fact. You want to believe the copying was accurate, but history provides no documentation of your claim. It will remain unknown. Jesus did not read a copy that looked like ours today, that much can be stated with fair certainty.
Nothing wrong with your faith, but those who don't share it will give it no weight.
On the road and out of power. You have a few free hours to take your best shots. Later

 

The Old Testament portions of the dead sea scrolls were found in agreement with our Old Testament. And they existed some 100 years before Christ. Which means that Christ was using the Old Testament that we use.

Quantrill

 

Got a little busy there…

Thank you!!! First – Jesus is talking about the Laws of Men, then God’s law is the Commandments. So, where is homosexuality? Which Commandment is that? Which law of man forbids homosexuality?

You are no different from those who believe in Evolution. The truth can slap you in the FACE and you still will be blind to it… Also, you are right – God has EXPLICIT instructions on things and please tell us what it states next… Is there anything about the “Law of Homosexuality”?

As we stated earlier… Jesus NEVER SAYS SQUAT ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY!!!! It is people like you who use the bible to Make Crap Up for their own agenda and use MISTREAT The Bible to do so!

Blasphemy!!!

Okay – that was “kinda” funny…

That’s ridiculous… If I said I saw a UFO and you said, “no you didn’t…” the burden of proof falls on you? Of course it doesn’t. You said Jesus feels a certain way about homosexuals without any evidence of him saying this. It’s basically calling you a lair and saying that you must prove it since it’s nowhere in the Bible (in red) that Jesus even “suggested” anything “close” to that…

Like Judas huh…

Here we go… Now – you understand that there will be homosexuals in Heaven right?

I know the Bible and I know of course there will be Homosexuals in Heaven and have repeatedly stated this without FAIL and included murderers and so forth. Some people will be unwilling to “change” for the evils that be are too strong and their flesh is too weak. But, it is not for US to decide who will and/or who will not be in Heaven. For I am not God nor would I EVER think that I was His equal and you should not either.

I don’t know about that – you just been arguing saying there will be no Homosexuals in Heaven after I said yes initially, and NOW you are saying there WILL be homosexuals.

If you do know The Word better than I, you show it horribly!!

 

This is pointless. One side of the argument has already declared explicitly that no process of reason, even reason based on mythical axioms, will have any effect. Before an argument is even made, they know that it's wrong, because they're right on everything they feel right about, no exceptions.

Why persist in serious discussion with people so pathetically insecure that they won't even consider the idea that their beliefs are reasonable? If they found their beliefs reasonable, they'd consider them amenable to reason, eh?

 

Of course your argument is that Jesus is saying to obey just the Ten Commandments and not all the other commandments that went with it? Good luck making that case.

Leviticus 18
22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.

Is that clear enough for you?

Because you aren't Christian and don't know Jesus, you have no understanding that Jesus IS the word of God in its entirety.

John 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

God doesn't say homosexuality is an abomination and then that it's ok later. Jesus is the very same God who gave that commandment. If you were a Christian, you'd understand that. So yes, Jesus DID give a specific commandment against homosexual behavior.

If you saw a flying object you couldn't identify, no I wouldn't argue with you.

The evidence of Christ's teachings are the teachings of the apostles. They taught what they learned from Christ himself:

Matthew 28
19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you

Judas wasn't at Pentacost. That was the graduation ceremony for the Apostles, in case you didn't know.

No, unrepented homosexuals will certainly NOT be in heaven:

1Corinthians 6
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither
fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,
10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.

I beg to differ.

Actually, I've been very consistant in what I've said:

That may be too complex for you, but I can't dumb it down any further than that.

 

There is just such a law (at least in the state of Florida).

See here:
http://www.glapn.org/sodomylaws/sensibilities/florida.htm

So, if those proponents want to claim that they are 'law abiding' citizens, then I would challenge them as a result of their behavior.

 

Exactly! Or more like it: we have copies of copies of copies of the long lost original texts. And if you ever had undergone the pains of having to learn about textual criticism that deals with finding out which copy might be a copy of which and which might be closest to the original, which text was a later insertion etc. you'd probably be a bit more sceptical when it comes to literal inerrancy. Those early Christian monks were doing their best, but they were certainly no supermen who never made mistakes. However: we've got to work with what we've got.

Thanks, I had.

I trust that everybody including me and you is educable. So let me inform you that they had the technology for parchments and ink that would last for 2000 years long before the first century. Here's a picture of the Ebers Papyrus written in about 1500 BC:


And here's one of the Papyrus P52, the oldest yet found fragment of a copy of the gospel of John. This fragment possibly dates back to before 100 AD, more likely though to about 125 - 160 AD:



It's great, isn't it? So there's still hope we find even older copies and fragments, maybe even the legendary Q source whose existence so far is just a hypothesis. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source) Just imagine if we found it and it contained some information on what Jesus thought about homosexuals that the evangelists somehow left out. Unlikely as it is, it's a fun thought!

 

All good information.
Prior to the professional copiests, the monks, the scriptures were copied by rank amateurs. If you were the guy who could write at all in your village, it was left to you to be the scribe. The errors would have been immense, and that does not even address the issue of scribes making intentional changes and additions to support their own pet doctrines and interpretations, which textural criticism can also make a very cogent case for.

 

So, god can't "inspire" those translating, to acurately translate? Do you really not see the utter stupidity in that?

 

of course there is. I used to be a christian. I no longer am. making me a FORMER christian.

 

I'm a former christian. you can stomp your feet and say "nuh uh" all you like, but reality is not going to change for you.

 

You have made Clemens proud by misusing the word autograph, which indicates the original document, not the sum of knowledge from all copies.

 

Er, you did miss the point about translating having to have something to translate FROM.

The original document?

Did it take a great mental leap to fill in the gap and figure this out? Do you feel better now that you used this bit of silliness to dismiss someone else as silly?

 

Yeah, the Jewish clergy and educated elite were hardly rank amateurs, and indeed, Paul, that vessel of transmission was hardly an illiterate dolt or a man so effusive in incompitence and organizational ability that he would allow just any idiot access to documents that are subsequently widely desseminated and ... mostly matching. Go figure.

The error is merely in your conjecture.

The process of creating the Canon is anything but what you present it as above.

 

Actually the word autograph is used by Bible scholars to describe the consensus among corroborating manuscripts. So no, I didn't misuse the word.

 

Not to mention that every copy was a project of imprimatur by the bishop and very closely supervised. Sometimes it was the bishop himself doing the work. Because a whole Bible often took generations to complete, there were plenty of eyes reviewing the work. What's remarkable is the accuracy of translation that we're able to discern today having access to all those many different manuscripts. Of all the literary works in the history of man, the Bible stands unrivaled in its ability to retain the original content over the course of over 1600 years.

 

Great- since i am not a Christian, I will just continue to point out that the words of Jesus in the New Testament do not support the conclusions you have reached.

I will continue to point out that Jesus's own words make it very clear that he was opposed to adultery and divorce.

Yet, you- and others focus on homosexuality, rather than what Jesus's says in his own words in the Bible.

Of course I could take your own route- and I could claim that since you are not an Atheist, you can't understand the New Testament like I can because your faith makes you ignore the actual text.

Anyway continue your monologue. Because once you have stated that only a Christian can understand what a Christian understands, there really isn't any reason for me to participate anymore, because I will never understand what you understand.

Good thing Jesus didn't feel that way.

 

Scribes were the first copyists of the Old.

Yes, thats what the manuscripts are, copies. I have done some studying into textual criticism, which does nothing but support that what we have in our present Bible is what was given by God in the original autographs.

There are some variations between the manuscripts, and other written witnesses. But these are very few. And none affect any doctrine. Most are trivial. Mispellings etc. The ones which involve a more serious nature such as John 8 or Mark 16, change nothing in any doctrine.

Quantrill

 

They expect to be forgiven (if they're christians) and you are supposed to forgive them, if you want your slice of heaven!

 

The 'science' of textual cristicism disagree with you. The Bible exists. It is always under fire. It is always either trying to be proved to be miscopied or in error.

That I believe it is the Word of God as it states, is my faith. That it is proven to be accurate as to the orignals is not faith. It is shown by critics to be so.

Quantrill

 

Immense? Not hardly. And most of those are trivial. Mispellings. etc.

Yes, textual criticism has identified what it believes are intentional changes. Not many at all.

Quantrill

 

No. God could inspire those translating, but we have nothing to indicate He did. God did inspire the original autographs.

Quantrill

 

No such thing as a former Christian. Scripture is clear.

Quantrill