Long Live the Confederation!
Dash. I broke the name. I'll change it.
Wow. I'm impressed vin, at your stance on this. All too many folks on this issue forget the fact that its the welfare of the child that must remain paramount, not the desires of the would-be parents.vindicator said:Gay people adopting children as I said before is horrid and isn't an issue with me.
The emphasis is not so much on HOW they are to be appointed, but rather on WHO is eligible to be appointed. Inasmuch as an apostle to replace Judas was appointed by the remaining apostles (after much prayer by them), IIRC that a similar process was used for other leaders of the local churches. Anyway, the qualifications go like this:Quarto said:...Having established that - pray tell, exactly where do the scriptures talk about how bishops should be appointed and who is elegible for such positions?
...How about marriage - where do the scriptures talk about who is elegible to be married... indeed, where do they talk about who is elegible to conduct marriages?
...I haven't read much of the Bible, so partially I ask this out of curiosity... however, I'm also pretty sure that the answer to at least some of the above questions is 'nowhere'.
Yup, "rant" pretty much nails it alright... :Methinks you misunderheard LOAFs post; he was saying that gay adoptive parents is better than no adoptive parents. In short, he's kinda AGREEING with you. I believe you owe the boy an apology...Hobbie said:Wow, LOAF really should not have had to say that, it should be obvious to you two children. Maybe you guys would have problems with gay parents... If a child is adopted...until they are old enough and wise enough to understand that there is nothing wrong with it. It just shocks me that you would rather a child be poor, starving, or uneducated then have that child have two loving parents. WHO CARES IF THEY ARE GAY IF THEY CARE ABOUT THE CHILD? It's just amazing your selfishness and insecurity. OK, I am done ranting.
Generally speaking, of course...Bob McDobb said:Spluh, I'm worn out from the week and don't feel like responding in the near future ... let's just agree for now that generalizations are generally bad
The STATE can feed & clothe 'em (and does)
Oh. Um, whoops...LOAF said:Perhaps you are not familiar with THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE WORLD.
No one said they "should" become straight. All the Bible requires is that they remain celibate, since they biblically are ineligible to marry.Pedro said:And for bloody hells sake stop saying gays shouldn't be married to eachother, that they should turn around get married with women and have kids, we're overpopulated enough as it is.
Um, nope. For one, we HAVE a reason, though you're sorta correct in saying it's not of this world: The Bible exists in our world, but it - for the Christian - came to us from another world; the kingdom of God. Also, there is no "separation" here; ALL are sinners (Romans 3:23). Hence, the rest of your passage is moot. I'll say again, God may not NEED mankind or its praises, but He has desired, and therefore has CHOSEN, to create us that we may love & adore Him. And, he has required of us that we do:Now lets take you, for seemingly no reason based in this world you like to seperate the world in holy and evil sinners, hence hurting people, causing rifts, so forgetting about God you fall under the category of evil, remembering God we remember he doesn't need anything.
-- Either that, or your parents are just suckers (or to use a nicer, more clinical term: "co-dependent"). What I mean is this: I can't tell you how many parents have had Johnny stay home with them despite his breaking their rules and totally disprespecting their authority, only to end up having a totally selfish, self-absorbed, disrespectful, rebellious, law-breaking, lazy, drug using slacker on their hands that they end up eventually unleashing on society. Now of course, they regret it by the time it gets that far, only by then its too late, and all of US get to pick up the pieces. How do I know this? For one, statistics & sociologists alike bear this out. More personally, though, this is exactly how my ex-wife raised her son, and that's exactly how he turned out....By the way a parent sets rules and guidlines, they don't say "love me despite the fact I may not exisit or roast on the eternal fires of hell" in fact my parents probably wouldn't even simply turn me out to find my own place if a rift came between us, I guess that makes them more forgiving than your all loving creator.
...And personally I'd be more likley to put up someone I couldn't stand in my house...than someone who had murdered somebody...surely God should be a little more concerned too.
Um, I'm not gonna waste my time on this one except to say to you this: Go back & do some reading on this thread: This kinda thing has been addressed already. If you don't agee with it, fine, but don't argue with me, argue with my Maker...I mean imagine a good honest human woman who happened to believe in god her whole life, despite everything that happened to her. She and mother were raped (yadda yadda yadda)....
there she finds her mothers killer and rapist who repented, the mob of people who killed her father as they believed they were doing gods work. By my definition that poor girl is in HELL
vindicator said:Gay people adopting children as I said before is horrid and isn't an issue with me
Preacher said:Yup, "rant" pretty much nails it alright... :Methinks you misunderheard LOAFs post; he was saying that gay adoptive parents is better than no adoptive parents. In short, he's kinda AGREEING with you. I believe you owe the boy an apology...
Yo, Dex: try using the "Quote" tags next time; it'll make your posts hella easier to understand. Anyway:dextorboot said:...So basically what you're telling me is that the concensus among religious denominations determined what would be in the Bible and NT ..., yes? ...Ok, so by that theory so long as the concensus is that if people want-to-be/are gay then it's ok.
...The RCC has actually reconsidered (multiple times) adding some more texts. They not to be put in for various reasons (completion of the text, contradicting other texts, fear of the catholics not accepting them...)
...You're using them to back your argument against homosexuality then discounting your source by saying it has been wrong before.
...2 Timothy 3:16 - the real keyword there is "inspired."
-- I guess there's no simplifying things for some people. I already pointed out that, the way the original poster phrased his assertion, it was oversimplified and thus not quite correct. I then went on to explain what the actual meaning was. Anyhoo, here's my response to that: Yes, we can sin in thought. But again, we only sin when we choose to entertain such thoughts; that is, to dwell on them and fantasize about them. Simply having a lust thought pass briefly thru your mind, there's no sin in that....Jesus says we can sin in thought also. Sorry pal.
...You may want to steer clear of Revelations for any of your arguments. It's prefaced by the author who claims it is no more than an account of what he saw, not what God told him to write...
...But it's not the first time a US prez has used his religious beliefs to dictate policy or American culture.
10-4.Hobbie said:Funny, I thought Thanksgiving originated with the Pilgrims and it is derived from way back then. Maybe Abe made if an official holiday, but I am pretty sure it was a Pilgrim tradition (them giving thanks for the crops and the help of the Native Americans, I believe).