What Would Jesus Do If Invited to a Gay Wedding?

[here]

Well, it was 95% water, with traces of urea, ethanol, salts, and various metabolites.

 

Yuck, you drank it.....

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Which ones?

The ones Moses took upon himself to write absent divine revelation.

[Big Dog]

Yuck, you drank it.....

 

No, but I've had urinalysis before, many times. I know what's in it.

I added "ethanol" to the list because we're talking about turning wine into water, but I have never had ethanol appear in a urine sample.

[Paulovere]

Honestly, I think Jesus would have went. God loved everyone, he didn't pick and choose. He didn't catch everybody when they lied and tell them not to do that, otherwise he'd still be doing it today too. I also don't believe god would be too upset with people loving each other, but more for the people committing sin to enforce their interpretation of the bible. If we sin to enforce our religious ways on others, we're no better than the terrorists in Middle East.

[MrsSmith]

It is a known fact that the Samaritans were a sect of Judaism, just as the Christians were (and still essentially are) a sect of Judaism.  You can take whatever you like from the Biblical story about the woman by the well, but the facts are the facts.  It always seems to be the facts about your own religion that throw some of you Christians the most.

Strangely enough, the woman in question obviously did NOT consider herself a Jew...but I'm sure YOU know better than some ancient woman about what she was.   

Also, Christianity is rooted in Judaism, but is certainly not a sect of it, as was made very plain in that New Testament that you've studied and read extensively (yet remain clueless about.)

[MrsSmith]

Honestly, I think Jesus would have went. God loved everyone, he didn't pick and choose. He didn't catch everybody when they lied and tell them not to do that, otherwise he'd still be doing it today too. I also don't believe god would be too upset with people loving each other, but more for the people committing sin to enforce their interpretation of the bible. If we sin to enforce our religious ways on others, we're no better than the terrorists in Middle East.

God loves everyone, but He hates sin.  If we sin by approving of sin, we are far worse than the terrorists.  They only kill the body, but we neglect the duty to the eternal soul.

[txradioguy]

Honestly, I think Jesus would have went.

No he wouldn't have.

God loved everyone, he didn't pick and choose.

No he made it very clear for all that Homosexuality was a sin.  And for Jesus to have gone against his Father's teachings would have been completely wrong out out of line with what Jesus taught.

He didn't catch everybody when they lied and tell them not to do that, otherwise he'd still be doing it today too.

He did then and he still does today.  Just because you aren't turned into a pillar of salt immediately doesn't mean you will not have to answer for what you have done on this earth at some point.

I also don't believe god would be too upset with people loving each other, but more for the people committing sin to enforce their interpretation of the bible. If we sin to enforce our religious ways on others, we're no better than the terrorists in Middle East.

Oh goody another one who likes to turn the Scriptures into something they aren't to justify his/her own desires over what they should be doing.

[Articulate Ape]

Strangely enough, the woman in question obviously did NOT consider herself a Jew...but I'm sure YOU know better than some ancient woman about what she was.   

Also, Christianity is rooted in Judaism, but is certainly not a sect of it, as was made very plain in that New Testament that you've studied and read extensively (yet remain clueless about.)

Once again, you reveal that your knowledge of the Bible and Christianity is confined to what you learned in Sunday school and that you are unfamiliar with the history of the Biblical texts and the religion themselves.  It is the only possible explanation you would make those two statements. Wow.

[Articulate Ape]

author=txradioguy | No he wouldn't have.

You sound so sure of yourself.  It's comforting to know that if we want to know the mind of God, we need only ask you.

Oh goody another one who likes to turn the Scriptures into something they aren't to justify his/her own desires over what they should be doing.

Look who's talking.

[obumazombie]

You sound so sure of yourself.  It's comforting to know that if we want to know the mind of God, we need only ask you.


Look who's talking.

We are to know the mind of God...through the scriptures. Not the corruption of them.
Let not many of you teach, for you will be held to a higher standard. Do not lead astray my sheep.
Luckily there are enough here to repel your heresy, and not be led astray, but what you proffer is corrupt.

[Articulate Ape]

Let not many of you teach, for you will be held to a higher standard.

So very true.

[obumazombie]

So very true.

I'm glad you decided to quit.

[Articulate Ape]

Oh zing.

[txradioguy]

You sound so sure of yourself.  It's comforting to know that if we want to know the mind of God, we need only ask you.

I stand sure of what the Scriptures say and what Jesus said about obeying his Father's teachings.

Do I REALLY need to repost those passages for a third time for you?

Look who's talking.

You better take a long hard look in the mirror dumbass.   You're the smug SOB who likes to tell us how wrong we all are and how you're such an enlightened thinker...yet can't back up what you say.

You've been embarrassed at one board on this topic...guess you want to try for two now huh?

[txradioguy]

Once again, you reveal that your knowledge of the Bible and Christianity is confined to what you learned in Sunday school and that you are unfamiliar with the history of the Biblical texts and the religion themselves.  It is the only possible explanation you would make those two statements. Wow.

Once again you arrogantly deride someone who obviously knows more than you do on the subject.

So tell me...where do you acquire your alleged knowledge of the Scriptures that makes you so certain we're all so wrong?

What or who makes you the undisputed expert?

[Articulate Ape]

Once again you arrogantly deride someone who obviously knows more than you do on the subject.

So tell me...where do you acquire your alleged knowledge of the Scriptures that makes you so certain we're all so wrong?

What or who makes you the undisputed expert?

High School World History classes?

[USA4ME]

So he didn't toil on Sabbath?  Sadly, scripture says that he did.  At any rate, it doesn't matter.  The point I have been trying to make, and one I believe Jesus would have agreed with, is that one would do better to focus on one's own walk than the walk of another.

Jesus did not violate any law given from God, and he was Lord of the Sabbath, so he did not sin.

And while one's own walk is important, Jesus also commands his followers to "Go, and teach" which would mean to involve oneself in the lives of others to bring them the gospel.

.

[txradioguy]

Jesus did not violate any law given from God, and he was Lord of the Sabbath, so he did not sin.

And while one's own walk is important, Jesus also commands his followers to "Go, and teach" which would mean to involve oneself in the lives of others to bring them the gospel.

.

Keep in mind when talking to AA about all things Biblical...you're dealing with someone who does not believe the Bible is the word of God.

[Articulate Ape]

Keep in mind when talking to AA about all things Biblical...you're dealing with someone who does not believe the Bible is the word of God.

It should be pointed out that ALL empirical evidence indicates that the Bible was penned, edited, and compiled by men.  Any other assertion is entirely based on belief (faith).  That is not to say that it is definitively NOT literally written by God, only that there is absolutely no tangible evidence to support that notion.  Therein lies the rub when it comes to Biblical debate.  There are those who approach any discussion of Biblical scriptures from a faith-based perspective and there are those that approach any such conversation from the perspective of known historical and scientific facts.  While the two perspectives need not be mutually exclusive, more often than not, the attitudes of the people engaging in a debate on the subject lend themselves to almost unavoidably engaging in debate from diametrically opposing logic streams.

This is perhaps why it is often wisest to avoid encounters of this sort so as to obviate hurt feelings from any vitriol that might develop where it otherwise would not.   Can we please agree to disagree and walk away friends rather than pissed off over something neither of us can change?

[txradioguy]

It should be pointed out that ALL empirical evidence indicates that the Bible was penned, edited, and compiled by men.  Any other assertion is entirely based on belief (faith).  That is not to say that it is definitively NOT literally written by God, only that there is absolutely no tangible evidence to support that notion.  Therein lies the rub when it comes to Biblical debate.  There are those who approach any discussion of Biblical scriptures from a faith-based perspective and there are those that approach any such conversation from the perspective of known historical and scientific facts.  While the two perspectives need not be mutually exclusive, more often than not, the attitudes of the people engaging in a debate on the subject lend themselves to almost unavoidably engaging in debate from diametrically opposing logic streams.

I don't know whether to laugh at you or feel sorry for you with your screwed up notion of how to read interpret and perceive the Bible.  You remind me of the Pharisees that demanded Jesus perform a miracle on demand to prove he was indeed the Son of God.

Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law answered Jesus. They said, "Teacher, we want to see you do a miracle as a sign (proof)." Jesus answered, "Evil and sinful people are the ones that want to see a miracle for a sign (proof). But no miracle will be given as a sign to those people. The only sign will be the miracle that happened to the prophet Jonah. Jonah was in the stomach of the big fish for three days and three nights. In the same way, the Son of Man will be in the grave three days and three nights." - Matthew 12:38-40

If you're waiting for some kind of empirical evidence or scientific proof...you're setting yourself up for a big BIG disappointment.  If you need that to somehow justify your belief in God...then your belief really isn't there in the first place.

That's why it's called faith.

This is perhaps why it is often wisest to avoid encounters of this sort so as to obviate hurt feelings from any vitriol that might develop where it otherwise would not.

This coming from the same person that said:

If you wish to debate the Bible with me, I suggest you show up well-armed because I'm packing.

The only thing you've been "packing" was a bunch of new age crap philosophy that doesn't stand up to close scrutiny.

Can we please agree to disagree and walk away friends rather than pissed off over something neither of us can change?

We were never friends to begin with you arrogant ass.

[obumazombie]

AA thinks change is a 4 letter word.

[Big Dog]

It should be pointed out that ALL empirical evidence indicates that the Bible was penned, edited, and compiled by men.  Any other assertion is entirely based on belief (faith).  That is not to say that it is definitively NOT literally written by God, only that there is absolutely no tangible evidence to support that notion.  Therein lies the rub when it comes to Biblical debate.  There are those who approach any discussion of Biblical scriptures from a faith-based perspective and there are those that approach any such conversation from the perspective of known historical and scientific facts.  While the two perspectives need not be mutually exclusive, more often than not, the attitudes of the people engaging in a debate on the subject lend themselves to almost unavoidably engaging in debate from diametrically opposing logic streams.

This is perhaps why it is often wisest to avoid encounters of this sort so as to obviate hurt feelings from any vitriol that might develop where it otherwise would not.   Can we please agree to disagree and walk away friends rather than pissed off over something neither of us can change?

BS for the highlighted shoddy writing. Try simple declarative sentences- one thought, one sentence.

Stop being a squish.

[Articulate Ape]

BS for the highlighted shoddy writing. Try simple declarative sentences- one thought, one sentence.

Stop being a squish.

I take it that English is your second language?

[Big Dog]

The only thing you've been "packing" was a bunch of new age crap philosophy that doesn't stand up to close scrutiny.

He did pack his Jockeys.

Ape, a tip: the rolled up sock goes in the front.

[obumazombie]

He did pack his Jockeys.

Ape, a tip: the rolled up sock goes in the front.

Egad...You mean he's a...socktucker ?