The Westboro Baptist Church and other Bible Thumpers

Post Reply New Topic

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOaZ3-daDTM[/youtube]

David was very fond of women, and enjoyed numerous wives and concubines. Did some women reject him when he was young? Are you saying that this is why he got in on with Jonathan?

Did his wives nag him?


Well, good for you, then.

Paul rags on a bit about homosexuality here and there. Which means that Christians were noticeably practising it.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuSjuZe8ncc&feature=related[/youtube][youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McxGZyBBXMY&feature=related[/youtube] sharp teeth to eat vegetables? seriously?! ! The earth is only 10,000 years old? hahaha I find it funny when those fossles are millions of years old and the earliest rocks are dated to be around 3.3 billion years old!

While they are entitled to their beliefs, they definitely seem to have overstepped the bounds on several occasions, such as the funerals of those killed in action, using threats of protesting at the site of the Safeway shooting spree as a bargaining chip in order to get desired airspace, and protesting the construction of handicap-accessible buildings by stating that the disabled are products of demons having intercourse with mankind, further stating that they should "crawl on the ground like the snakes they are." What I cannot fathom is the stance the Supreme Court has taken in regards to this organization. You cannot yell racial slurs without it being viewed as hate speech, but you sure can say "Thank God for dead soldiers" (and the remark about the disabled) without consequence.

You seem to be projecting the ideals of modern Southern Baptists onto ancient bronze-age thugs. There isn't anything in the Old Testament about politely trying to convince your friends to stop sinning. When the Israelites started worshipping the golden calf, there was no second chance. It was a wholesale massacre. Same with just about every other little thing.

Trespassing and harassment are over the line. These Church creeps have violated the peace of civil life.

ruveyn

It doesn't seem David "did" anything with Jonathan, so I'm not sure what you mean by "he got in on with."

Saul tried to hook David up with Merab. Apparently Merab had no affection for David, Saul really just wanted to get rid of him, and David at least on the surface exercised humility in rejecting Merab. Michal, on the other hand, did love David. Saul set a bounty of 200 Philistines evidenced by bringing in their foreskins in exchange for Michal in hopes that fighting the Philistines would get David killed. Later Saul gave Michal to another man. David later had Michal returned to him, but apparently things were never the same between them. 2 Samuel 6 has Michal deriding David for shaking his balls in front of the ark. Well...that's my personal interpretation of it. My translation has it "How the king of Israel honored himself today! He exposed himself in the sight of the slave girls of his subjects like a vulgar person would expose himself." His relationship with Michal clearly wasn't a pleasant one. David's friendship with Jonathan seems to have had a constancy that David to that point just didn't find in women. We need not assume that the relationship had a perverse physical component.


We have at least one example of Michal trying to embarrass him. If she was so bold to publicly shame him that way, one should wonder what she was like in private.


You do realize that false testimony, also known as "lying," is prohibited in the 10 Commandments, right?


OK, but that only indicates at least SOME Christians were practicing it, not that it was recognized by the first Christians as acceptable behavior. Paul indicates that it is NOT acceptable behavior for Christians.

Paul indicates that nothing is acceptable behavior for Christians. The dude hated everyone and everything, but especially those things that dealt with sex or sexuality of any kind.

At least it isn't in the site rules.

Not really. Marriage and family can be a distraction from serving God. Jesus once asked a man to follow Him. The man agreed, but first asked that he say goodbye to his family. Jesus gave him permission to settle his affairs when He said "A man who puts his hand to the plow and turns back isn't fit for the kingdom of heaven," which is a reference to Elijah the prophet when he called Elisha. In other words, "Sell all that you own, give to the poor, and follow Me."

What Paul did was basically the same thing. He devoted his life to celibacy in order to stay focused on his mission. In ancient Israel, the Nazirite vow involved celibacy until the vow was fulfilled. It could have been that Paul took a lifelong Nazirite vow.

I don't think Paul hated anybody. Well, he obviously hated Christians prior to his conversion, but his life after conversion was radically different. He didn't mince words, either, but he acted out of a desire to instruct and build up early Christian churches.

True. But it is going to have a bearing on how seriously I'm able to take you.

I've never been quote-mined before, though. I'm not sure if I should be honored or offended.

Everyone's a sinner, no one deserves to go to Heaven.
People who have faith are saved by God's grace, not because they're more worthy than the next guy.
Isn't that how Christianity goes?
So who cares if homosexuality is a sin or not? He's a sinner, I'm a sinner, you're a sinner too. ....I think there's a jingle there somewhere. Dr. Pepper, was it?

Consider yourself honoured.

Well, this is true. But the crux of our argument here is one about whether WBC/Bible Thumpers have a scriptural basis for condemnation of homosexuality. It seems pretty clear to me that the Bible condemns it. I'm not entirely sure what the big deal is, but I haven't even been the one bringing it up. This whole thing got derailed when it took a heterophobic turn for the worst on page 2. I just responded by saying I didn't think that WBC or Mormons were really Christian, and then we're back to whether the Bible condemns homosexuality or not. In fact, it was BreezeGod who brought up Prop 8. It seems to me he's the one you need to ask as to why everyone (on both sides of the argument) is so obsessed with homosexuality.

Christians SHOULD care, though. It's not that you somehow lose your "fire insurance" if you're a homosexual, but the issue is whether the Holy Spirit has effected a change in one's life as a result of personal salvation. What is a Christian supposed to look like? And that would be a person who avoids sin or repents from sinful behavior as soon as he's aware of it. I don't believe sin is "curable." But awareness of it ought to lead to a desire to be free from it. It might be a long process that takes time, or it might be something you fight on a daily basis. You might slip up from time to time. Feeling guilty about it should be a good indication that you're on the right track because at least then you're admitting that something is wrong. Someone not protected by God's grace would find less guilt in indulging in sin and more difficulty breaking free of it, the reason being they'd have no desire to. And that's sin as a whole, not just anything specific. If you're a Christian, it ought to follow that your life is exemplary of a higher moral standard. If you claim Christ but don't live any differently than those who don't believe, exactly what incentive do you give others to adopt your faith? If a Christian desires to be closer to God and emulate Christ, he's going to avoid sin, and that entails knowing what sinful behavior is and what behaviors aren't tolerated or accepted.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Slom_-OfXI[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPY_xWci9AA[/youtube]Oh jeez whats wrong with these people.

Uh, how so? Where does anyone disparage heterosexuals?