Top 17 Reasons Why Gay Marriage is Wrong

Post Reply New Topic

First, he points out that all Mankind have the power to heal with words of forgiveness.

Secondly, he points out that it is the sinners, not the righteous, who most need the attention of the religious authorities.

Thirdly, he points out the futility of expecting a person who is furthest from God to pursue Godly habits of living, using the analogy of pouring fresh wine into an old wineskin. He is correct. It is useless to demand religious piety of those whose souls would still be unclean. It is wasted upon them. By his argument, they cannot truly benefit from religious piety until their hearts are ready.

Fourthly, he makes a point that he elaborates upon in Matthew, which is really more appropriate for understanding the whole PURPOSE of the New Testament. By the way, if you haven't read Isaiah, you're going to be a little bit confused most of the time when reading the NT. It makes a lot more sense if you've read Isaiah. In a sense, he draws some of his point FROM Isaiah. His point was that the Sabbath was a gift to Mankind, not a burden.

In all cases, his central point is clear: don't be a pious ass. It doesn't do a thing for your immortal soul, and all it does is annoy people.

It's simple reading comp. It doesn't take a genius to understand what Jesus was getting at.

Last edited by Griff on 09 Apr 2008, 9:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Let me explain more clearly how the quotation applies directly to what I said. Keeping the Jewish Sabbath was a TRADITION that constituted the acceptance and observance of a strict code of behavior called rest or, "a dogma, a catechism of beliefs to which ... a person must adhere in order to be right with God." This imperative to not work on the Sabbath meant that Jews were forbidden to harvest grain at all on that day. Jesus and his disciples were picking grain and eating it on the particular Sabbath day when Jesus said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27). By breaking the Sabbath TRADITION in that way, he was showing that the TRADITION of the Sabbath, being for man and not the other way around, was not a dogma or catechism, but rather a way of life. I believe this is the same attitude those that follow Jesus Christ, Christians, should have towards their TRADITION, otherwise how could it be said that we were actually following him?

I'm sorry about the tone. I'm not trying to be an ass. I'm just frustrated with this thread like so many other people. I like you, skafather84, and appreciate your comments. I didn't capitalize the word tradition because I was yelling or anything although that is what it looks like. I just did it so that the connection to what I said would be clearer. Again, sorry about the tone. I'm just frustrated.

Last edited by spdjeanne on 09 Apr 2008, 9:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

yeah cause women want to see they're rights taken away,
yeah blacks wanna be slaves
gays wanna be killed
the only ones who could have ever liked it back then was the rich
as always
because they have something to gain
or your perception of the "normal man"
the bible is utter bull s**t
you don't see it but its a drug that stops you from thinking (or your just a complete loser)
religion is dying, and I will cheer the day it does

What do you think of my interpretation, Jeanne? They are very good ideas, actually, if certain people would bother to apply them.

The wineskin analogy is a simple one, by the way, taken in context.

I agree with you

I think you're right on. However, your paraphrase at the end was a little harsh, but the harshness just made me laugh a little. Thanks

Indeed, and thank you.

How do you interpret Isaiah, by the way?

I'll bet you miss those days. God forbid she doesn't sympathize for her prejudiced oppressive society's right to be social oppressors. But we're in the "land of the free", where your bible is the unquestionable law of secular society Well I recon it's about time for you to go home, chew your baccy and beat your wife Earl.... Or your slave, or whomever you've got on the plantation. You talk about how "far we've come" since the "old days", but people like you always wanna fight to have those "old days" back. You sicken me.
Dude, people need to get the f**k real, save the drama for your mommas. I may not agree with everything zendell says, but I support him/her on this one.

Zendell DOES support those days, and spends a lot of time advocating for bringing them back - and you agree with him???
Whose posts have you been reading?

Remember that one, if nothing else. Mankind has this awesome power to erase the suffering of others with forgiveness and contrition. Let's not totally throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Hmmm, I wonder why this thread is so popular.

Why do ppl worry about one's sexual orientation and their need to be treated as equals surely no one chooses their preference esp. in a society that puts it down. BTW, not everybody's Christian, is that necessarily wrong in terms of a society?

Also, there are many people who do things against the good book. I happen to like what some of the good book says although I don't always agree with since it was written by men as in humans way back when. God didn't write the book, but that's my opinion unless there's data to back that up.

This is why church and state were seperated for these reasons.

Oh no, I'm probably going to be debated on this one.

I agree that the Bible, "was written by men as in humans way back when." However, the conclusion that many people (not necessarily you) draw from that statement, that God doesn't exist, does not necessarily follow. If the God of the Bible is merely a character in said book, they are right. However, there is the possibility that these fallible humans were writing about their real experiences with a real God.

I agree in the separation of church and state. I am aware that there are lots of people who are not Christian. However, that does not mean that Christians are not also part of the state.

Christians do not constituted one monolithic opinion about homosexuality. We are very conflicted over it. Just take a look at the Anglican Communion, for just one example. It is my understanding that the majority of Christians still believe homosexuality to be a sin, but there are many Christians, including myself who do not.

Christian dogma is not the only place you can find a negative view of homosexuality. Granted at the moment, in America anyway, it is the predominant source of said negativity, but this is not the only source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_a ... _religions

Lienda doesn't pick sides. As always, I do it alone, and that should be obvious. Meat my grandfather. Now HE'S a highly "my way" Christian devotie, and believe me... nothing less. To be honest, he's 'devote" the the point of being flat obsurd. You think Zendall is devoted. But you see, my grandfather is hardly different, and this thread makes that fact very clear to me. He only has a different belief system.

Just like any other bisexual, I go in the middle and get squashed. One end we have people that want to keep "pointing out the flaw", which is annoying enough. On the other we have irrationality. "You findies die already, and leave us in peace!" nice...

If I sight what Budda says, that doesn't make me buddist. Though that one also has some good points. I have been to many churches that are against being gay, growing up. There are some that accept homosexuality, but many do not.

Then again...Why is this thread still running, and why the heck am I waisting my time putting my points out into a wall? Geez everywhere I go this happens. People only get alone is a perfect world.

Last edited by LiendaBalla on 10 Apr 2008, 9:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

It's an unliteral term refering to 'dissaster". In this case, the joke implies "meteors and Volcanoes" as something rediculess like "Homosexuals will destroy the world and cause Armegedon". Yeah, I wish...

Thanks