What's a Preacher to do?

Yurt said:
i've already posted NT law concerning it, you're just going to ignore the bible and rewrite it in your image....

i have yet to encounter someone who claims sex during menstruation is no longer a sin...once again, more spin from maineman...why don't you start threads about it, you have no fucking clue what i believe or don't believe, so stop your whining about the other sins and focus on this one...you apparently believe that if you can break one, why not break them all and hell, why not abolish them all.

homosexuality is also mentioned as a sin in the NT, i don't believe the other laws (not all of them are "sins" they are just laws, i can't believe you're a preacher and don't know the difference between laws and sins) are mentioned again in the NT. i am not a scholar, but i do know that the NT says homosexuality is a sin, that is a fact, it is the act, period. no matter how much you love someone, once you complete the act, it is a sin. you are changing the bible to suit your agenda.
Click to expand...
The NT mentions sex during menstruation? I thought that was one of the "keep clean" rules that were changed by the New Covenant...
 
maineman said:
I am merely advocating that gays and lesbians be allowed to marry the people that they love. Many theologians WAY more learned than I am agree with that position. I am sorry that you don't.
Click to expand...

wrong again, you said it was NOT a sin, now you're (as usual) changing your stance and saying you are "merely" advocating marriage...:rolleyes:
 
Jeff said:
IMO he gave it away, looking at his post here really makes ya wonder
Click to expand...
No shit now he's intent on selling the souls in the church that he is preaching to. Man can you imagine if we knew where this guy preached- we could print all this out and mail it to the church board. I wonder what they'd say about it. :readit:
 
Southern Man said:
No shit now he's intent on selling the souls in the church that he is preaching to. Man can you imagine if we knew where this guy preached- we could print all this out and mail it to the church board. I wonder what they'd say about it. :readit:
Click to expand...

You would fuck with someone's real life? Thats pretty fucked up.
 
interesting observation, any truth to this?....

The Old Testament had clearly condemned homosexuality but in Paul's day there were those persons who rejected its teaching. Because of their rejection of God's commands He punished their sin by delivering them over to it.

The philosophy of substituting God's Word with one's own reasoning commenced with Satan. He introduced it at the outset of the human race by suggesting to Eve that she ignore God's orders, assuring her that in so doing she would become like God with the power to discern good and evil (Genesis 3:1-5). That was Satan's big lie. Paul said that when any person rejects God's truth, his mind becomes "reprobate," meaning perverted, void of sound judgment. The perverted mind, having rejected God's truth, is not capable of discerning good and evil.

http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1302
 
Southern Man said:
No shit now he's intent on selling the souls in the church that he is preaching to. Man can you imagine if we knew where this guy preached- we could print all this out and mail it to the church board. I wonder what they'd say about it. :readit:
Click to expand...

I don't think they would be to happy at all!

WinterBorn if a cop was on here bragging how he committed a crime should someone turn him in? A fireman committing arson? Although I do realize this is the net and real life is real life, there is a point where ya have to wonder just how far is to far? I myself would want to know if my preacher was on here threatening people, telling the sick he/she hopes they die so they could piss on there grave, threatening minor children with sick sexual fantasies. So normally I would agree with you 100% but when ya think about it???
 
Yurt said:
interesting observation, any truth to this?....

The Old Testament had clearly condemned homosexuality but in Paul's day there were those persons who rejected its teaching. Because of their rejection of God's commands He punished their sin by delivering them over to it.

The philosophy of substituting God's Word with one's own reasoning commenced with Satan. He introduced it at the outset of the human race by suggesting to Eve that she ignore God's orders, assuring her that in so doing she would become like God with the power to discern good and evil (Genesis 3:1-5). That was Satan's big lie. Paul said that when any person rejects God's truth, his mind becomes "reprobate," meaning perverted, void of sound judgment. The perverted mind, having rejected God's truth, is not capable of discerning good and evil.

http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1302
Click to expand...


interesting observation... are you now ready to abide by all 613 of God's commands as delivered to Moses?

Or are you going to suggest that some of them might not apply to modern day living?

And if you ARE going to reject SOME of Moses' laws, but not all... can you explain your rationale for chosing the ones you did and ignoring the rest? Can you even BEGIN to delineate which of the 613 you are even AWARE of, let alone adhere to?

And then, do the same for all of Paul's admonitions... and then Peter's and then John's and then James'... and on and on...

Please delineate those that you follow and those that you don't....and be aware that many of those in Paul's writings are contradicted by those in James' writings.

I anxiously anticipate your list... oh reverent one.
 
Yurt said:
wrong again, you said it was NOT a sin, now you're (as usual) changing your stance and saying you are "merely" advocating marriage...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

so what does the slippery minister do....ignores this post....goes back to the 613 commandments as if that makes his point, despite the fact that i have never said they are not sin, and in fact have repeatedly said about 4 times, that i personally do not know which are sin and which are laws....if they are sin and that sin was not abrograted, then they ARE STILL SIN. maineman, are you simple or something?

maybe he is desperate, changing his stance as usual, claiming he is now for something else than he originally claimed and goes on the attack about something already discussed as nauseum....

(yawn)
 
its funny, maineman's 613 argument fails for so many reasons...i guess maineman thinks beastiality, incest and adultery are no longer sins either...

are you saying incest is not a sin minister? your earlier claim was lamely that it is not biological...laughable as neither is homosexuality. what about adultery....no longer a sin? beastiality...no longer a sin? you've dug yourself a hole and the only way you feel you can get out is to attack me and falsely claim i condemn people.

i'll let the word of god speak for itself:

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
 
Yurt said:
so what does the slippery minister do....ignores this post....goes back to the 613 commandments as if that makes his point, despite the fact that i have never said they are not sin, and in fact have repeatedly said about 4 times, that i personally do not know which are sin and which are laws....if they are sin and that sin was not abrograted, then they ARE STILL SIN. maineman, are you simple or something?

maybe he is desperate, changing his stance as usual, claiming he is now for something else than he originally claimed and goes on the attack about something already discussed as nauseum....

(yawn)
Click to expand...
Honestly I don't know how a preacher who acts this way sleeps at might. Unless of course he's committed himself for delivering sold to the devil.
 
Yurt said:
so what does the slippery minister do....ignores this post....goes back to the 613 commandments as if that makes his point, despite the fact that i have never said they are not sin, and in fact have repeatedly said about 4 times, that i personally do not know which are sin and which are laws....if they are sin and that sin was not abrograted, then they ARE STILL SIN. maineman, are you simple or something?

maybe he is desperate, changing his stance as usual, claiming he is now for something else than he originally claimed and goes on the attack about something already discussed as nauseum....

(yawn)
Click to expand...

the issue of the relevance of Mosaic law is still there as far as I am concerned. You seem to want to condemn homosexuals as sinners but also seem blithely willing to remain ignorant as to the canon of laws and sins and admonitions that you yourself might be breaking each and every day. I wonder why you have such an obsession with homosexuality and such a casual disinterest in your own potential sinfulness.

I also said that I am advocating that gays and lesbians be allowed to marry the people that they love. Many theologians WAY more learned than I am agree with that position. I am sorry that you don't.
 
Maineman, the ruse is up. You are picking and choosing your philosophy to suit your agenda. Normally that would be fine, but when its a Biblical philosophy and you're supposedly a preacher and therefore responsible not simply for lives but for souls you are committing an extremely vile sin.
 
maineman said:
the issue of the relevance of Mosaic law is still there as far as I am concerned. You seem to want to condemn homosexuals as sinners but also seem blithely willing to remain ignorant as to the canon of laws and sins and admonitions that you yourself might be breaking each and every day. I wonder why you have such an obsession with homosexuality and such a casual disinterest in your own potential sinfulness.

I also said that I am advocating that gays and lesbians be allowed to marry the people that they love. Many theologians WAY more learned than I am agree with that position. I am sorry that you don't.
Click to expand...

appeal to authority, logical fallacy....further, if you want to go down that road, there are MORE theologians that believe homosexuality is a sin versus those who believe it is not a sin, so on that count, you lose.

so is adultery now no longer a sin? incest no longer a sin? bestiality no longre a sin? those are part of the mosiac laws, if you are going to claim homosexuality is no longer a sin, then you are claiming that all the rest are no longer sins. your use of the mosaic laws to try and trip me up actually harms your case and in reality destroys your case and shows your base hyppocrisy.

maineman, the very fact you claim that i am obsessed about homosexuality is telling about your desperate state. as i already told you, bring up the other subjects, as far as i am aware, homosexuality is the only topic people around the world are running around talking about and claiming it is no longer a sin. and think about your logic, if i am obsessed, then so are you as YOU keep claiming homosexuality is not a sin...and keep responding as much as i. your logic is failing, i suggest you get on your knees and ask why.

i'll let the word of god speak for itself:

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

as you can see, the bible is unequivocal that homosexuality is unnatural. you need to take a good look at your arguments as you earlier claimed incest is a sin becuase it is not biologically sound. that is 1) hypocritical with regards to homosexuality, and 2) you've now been given evidence that the ACTS of homosexual are unnatural, not just lust, but the acts of men laying with other men is perversion.
 
WinterBorn said:
You are one sick fuck. You post about screwing someone's job and then continue with the delusions when someone points out that you are wrong for doing so.
Click to expand...

Not saying anyone should fool with someone's livelihood, but would you want your preacher on the internet doing these things? Again as sick as this man is I figure it can't just be a internet thing, he must be somewhat like this in real life, so I feel for his congregation but figure maybe there not to far off from him.

I had asked in a earlier post about other professions and what ya thought, you didn't reply, this leads me to believe you may agree, I surely wouldn't want him as my preacher but as I said birds of a feather flock together, so maybe they deserve each other.
 
Jeff said:
Not saying anyone should fool with someone's livelihood, but would you want your preacher on the internet doing these things? Again as sick as this man is I figure it can't just be a internet thing, he must be somewhat like this in real life, so I feel for his congregation but figure maybe there not to far off from him.

I had asked in a earlier post about other professions and what ya thought, you didn't reply, this leads me to believe you may agree, I surely wouldn't want him as my preacher but as I said birds of a feather flock together, so maybe they deserve each other.
Click to expand...

I think everyone's taking it all a bit seriously.

I'm always banging on about homosexuals, dirty lasses getting up to all sorts and all manner of devilry on message boards. Sometimes i even look at pictures of girls doing it with each other on the internets and i'm the Archbishop of York.

Fuck all that shit, it doesn't stop me swinging my mitre like a good 'un come Sunday morning down the Minster and delivering a sermon that kicks the Archbishop of Canterbury's fat arse.
 
Yurt said:
appeal to authority, logical fallacy....further, if you want to go down that road, there are MORE theologians that believe homosexuality is a sin versus those who believe it is not a sin, so on that count, you lose.

so is adultery now no longer a sin? incest no longer a sin? bestiality no longre a sin? those are part of the mosiac laws, if you are going to claim homosexuality is no longer a sin, then you are claiming that all the rest are no longer sins. your use of the mosaic laws to try and trip me up actually harms your case and in reality destroys your case and shows your base hyppocrisy.

maineman, the very fact you claim that i am obsessed about homosexuality is telling about your desperate state. as i already told you, bring up the other subjects, as far as i am aware, homosexuality is the only topic people around the world are running around talking about and claiming it is no longer a sin. and think about your logic, if i am obsessed, then so are you as YOU keep claiming homosexuality is not a sin...and keep responding as much as i. your logic is failing, i suggest you get on your knees and ask why.

i'll let the word of god speak for itself:

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

as you can see, the bible is unequivocal that homosexuality is unnatural. you need to take a good look at your arguments as you earlier claimed incest is a sin becuase it is not biologically sound. that is 1) hypocritical with regards to homosexuality, and 2) you've now been given evidence that the ACTS of homosexual are unnatural, not just lust, but the acts of men laying with other men is perversion.
Click to expand...


I have never said that adultery was not a sin, or that murder was not a sin or that incest was not a sin. I happen to believe that the people who wrote the bible did not have all the right answers. I happen to believe that, in many cases, their writings were based upon beliefs that we now understand to be inaccurate. As I said, I am advocating that gays and lesbians be allowed to marry the people that they love. Many theologians WAY more learned than I am agree with that position. I am sorry that you don't.

I am not tossing out Mosaic law... I am not endorsing all of Mosaic law either. Which are YOU doing? Are you suggesting that it is ALL valid today or is some of it no longer valid? And if you ARE tossing out parts of what Moses said, who gives you the authority to pick and choose?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top