PDA

View Full Version : When Faith and Reality Clash



The Left Sock
02-16-2014, 10:03 PM
The pastor of a Kentucky Pentecostal Church, featured in a reality TV show, lost his life over his literal belief in the Bible:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/16/us/snake-salvation-pastor-bite/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

In actuality, his faith cost him his life twice, when you think about it. First, he lost his life by believing that the Bible says that venomous serpents cannot harm those who 'are true believers anointed by God', and then he lost his life again, by refusing to get treated, after he got bit by a poisonous snake.

So, he knew he was bit, knew the poison was affecting him, and yet still held onto his beliefs? How do you reconcile that kind of ignorance?

There is what we know as fact. Then there is what the Bible says. The two don't always match up. Yet, despite being in the 21st century, with all the technology and science at our disposal, some people are still willing to go through life holding onto biblical definitions of truth, rather than hard reality.

This is just one example. How many other examples of Bible truth not matching practical truth are there? How many lives are being impacted by choosing biblical belief over reality?

It's a fascinating area of belief to examine. When your beliefs are proven dead wrong by pure science and evidence, should you still hold onto it? Risk your life for it? Risk the lives of others?

Bluesky
02-17-2014, 07:36 AM
See here. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2016&version=NIVhttp://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2016&version=NIV

No reputable Bible scholar accepts that this passage is a part of the original m****cripts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16

The Berean
02-17-2014, 09:58 AM
Interesting that the Roman Catholic church accepts these verses as part of the canon. But I guess none of them were dumb enough to test God in this way.

BTW, Sock, it is recognized by thinking Christians, that it is dangerous to defend ANY doctrine on the basis of one verse.

The Left Sock
02-17-2014, 09:59 AM
So, your Bible is not the literal, divinely inspired word of God? Some parts need to be removed?

Okay, what about this then?

Acts 28:

"3 And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand.

4 And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live.

5 And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm."

Or how about this?

Luke 10:

"19. Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.

There are a number of references to believers being protected from snakes. So, why would removing Mark 16 change any of that?

The Berean
02-17-2014, 10:04 AM
"So, your Bible is not the literal, divinely inspired word of God? Some parts need to be removed?"

I have never said that.

Bluesky
02-17-2014, 10:56 AM
So, your Bible is not the literal, divinely inspired word of God? Some parts need to be removed?

Correct, none of our translated texts are inspired. It is only the original m****cripts that are viewed as inspired word of God. All else is copied, transmitted, translated and thus prone to human error and interpolation.

Bluesky
02-17-2014, 11:10 AM
Now for the rest of your concern - the New Testament believer is typically Jewish at this time. This business of "treading on serpents and scorpions" has a long history that goes back to the Exodus out of Egypt and their wandering through the wilderness. Snakes were always seen as representative of SAtan, who is referred to as a serpent, and that is how he was represented in the Garden of Eden at the original temptation.

So there is some double entendre going on in the gospel of Luke, particularly as you see the verse you quoted sandwiched into a paragraph that speaks of the spiritual conflict that the disciples are being sent into. So let's quote the entire piece.

17 The seventy-two returned with joy, saying, “Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!” 18*And he said to them, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. 19*Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you. 20*Nevertheless, do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.”
(Lk 10:17–20)

Thus, I believe this is meant to be figurative. Yes, Paul was bitten by a poisonous snake and nothing happened to him. That is a descriptive passage, not a prescriptive one. I am sure that people to this day that people experience similar miraculous events. But to suggest that the Bible teaches that we are supposed to expose ourselves to danger (even IF the passage in Mark is authentic) because God promised us deliverance is nuts.

Then lets go make ourselves sick on purpose because the Bible teaches is that the prayer of faith will heal the sick.

The Left Sock
02-17-2014, 12:05 PM
Two of the major Christian gospels speak of true believers being safe from snake bites. I see a lot of back-peddling and explaining away here of what is clearly being claimed. Suddenly, the Bible is a 'metaphoric', 'figurative' text, not meant to be taken literally. Parts should maybe even be edited out!

That's a far cry from what I see a lot of Christians claiming.

Yet, oddly enough, Christians will hang on for dear life to two small, vague Old Testament references in Leviticus, and condemn a segment of the population outright, with no doubts about their righteousness.

I think it would have been a much more prudent course of action to simply claim that the Pentecostal pastor who died from playing with snakes must have done something to offend God, and was thus not protected. It would have been an easier position to defend.

The Berean
02-17-2014, 12:14 PM
Sock, did you ever think of yourself as God's straight man?? :) :) :)

We'll continue to interpret the way the vast majority of bible believers and scholars do, and you do as you see fit!!

And for goodness sake, stay away from any snakes!!!

The Left Sock
02-17-2014, 12:16 PM
"Then lets go make ourselves sick on purpose because the Bible teaches is that the prayer of faith will heal the sick."

Based on that, what sense does it make then, to pray for the sick?

Addicts make themselves sick on purpose, people still pray for them, and people still believe that prayer can heal them.

So, why shouldn't people believe that you can make yourself sick on purpose, and still be healed by faith? It happens all the time, according to many Christians.

The conundrums grow deeper. The pool is not getting clearer.

The Left Sock
02-17-2014, 12:19 PM
"We'll continue to interpret the way the vast majority of bible believers and scholars do, and you do as you see fit!!"

Well, either your Bible is the word of God, and it's entire contents are to be taken as literal and true, or it is just a collection of stories by some writers from a long time ago.

When you start talking interpretations, and popular opinions, the Bible gets reduced to a collection of stories. It can't be any other way, and you can't have it both ways.

The Berean
02-17-2014, 12:27 PM
Sorry, your definition of our beliefs is incorrect and uneducated.

Bluesky
02-17-2014, 01:41 PM
"Then lets go make ourselves sick on purpose because the Bible teaches is that the prayer of faith will heal the sick."

Based on that, what sense does it make then, to pray for the sick?

Addicts make themselves sick on purpose, people still pray for them, and people still believe that prayer can heal them.

So, why shouldn't people believe that you can make yourself sick on purpose, and still be healed by faith? It happens all the time, according to many Christians.

The conundrums grow deeper. The pool is not getting clearer.


Well then stop throwing mud, silly man.

I am talking about presumptuously getting sick to prove that God answers prayer for the sick. You know, like the snake handlers.

People who are addicts generally are not out to presumptuously prove that God answers prayer.

Bluesky
02-17-2014, 01:55 PM
"We'll continue to interpret the way the vast majority of bible believers and scholars do, and you do as you see fit!!"

Well, either your Bible is the word of God, and it's entire contents are to be taken as literal and true, or it is just a collection of stories by some writers from a long time ago.

If I start arguing with you about Buddhism, you do not appreciate it when I build a strawman. Afford the Christians the same courtesy and do not build strawmen with your interpretation of what Christians believe or ought to.

Take your statement above, for instance.

You present a false dilemma and by it, a strawman which becomes easy to defeat and makes you feel good about your victory!

The fact is, no one takes the Bible as completely literal. Figures of speech, analogies and symbolism abound in the Scriptures.

Get with the program.


When you start talking interpretations, and popular opinions, the Bible gets reduced to a collection of stories. It can't be any other way, and you can't have it both ways.

There is a consensus that has been developed over the centuries. We listen carefully to that consensus. We have extant man_uscripts that settle the textual problem you have raised.

And finally, (one more time) do you really and seriously think that if God really had said in the gospel of Mark that he will protect us from poisonous snakes and scorpions, that we should then go swimming in a snake infested pool? By that logic, we should all go and live in sin and corruption, because God said, "Where sin abounds, there grace abounds much more." God did say that if we confess our sins, He will forgive us our sins. So lets all dive into a moral cesspool and get filthy, to prove that God will forgive us.

If that is what you think of Christianity, you have been seriously misled.
But I think you are more intelligent than that.

dancingqueen
02-17-2014, 02:36 PM
God knows what is in our hearts. Taking that into consideration, getting intentionally bitten by a snake would be akin to testing God. If I where God I'd let him die too. Although people die all the time from accidentally getting bitten by a snake sooooo yah, there is that....
besides that point, how does one know if a position in the Bible is anecdotal or literal? I mean people condemn homosexuality by single verses or multiple individual verses yet completely ignore the historical relevance.

Aristotle
02-17-2014, 04:14 PM
The pastor of a Kentucky Pentecostal Church, featured in a reality TV show, lost his life over his literal belief in the Bible:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/16/us/snake-salvation-pastor-bite/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

In actuality, his faith cost him his life twice, when you think about it. First, he lost his life by believing that the Bible says that venomous serpents cannot harm those who 'are true believers anointed by God', and then he lost his life again, by refusing to get treated, after he got bit by a poisonous snake.

So, he knew he was bit, knew the poison was affecting him, and yet still held onto his beliefs? How do you reconcile that kind of ignorance?

There is what we know as fact. Then there is what the Bible says. The two don't always match up. Yet, despite being in the 21st century, with all the technology and science at our disposal, some people are still willing to go through life holding onto biblical definitions of truth, rather than hard reality.

This is just one example. How many other examples of Bible truth not matching practical truth are there? How many lives are being impacted by choosing biblical belief over reality?

It's a fascinating area of belief to examine. When your beliefs are proven dead wrong by pure science and evidence, should you still hold onto it? Risk your life for it? Risk the lives of others?

It's why the Bible should not be seen as literal in every sense.

The Left Sock
02-17-2014, 09:02 PM
"So lets all dive into a moral cesspool and get filthy, to prove that God will forgive us."

That's the whole point of Christianity, isn't it? We're all sinners, we are born sinners, we will die sinners, we are all 'dirty', and the only way any of us get into heaven is by being forgiven.

According to Christianity, we dive into a moral cesspool upon birth.

The Berean
02-17-2014, 09:36 PM
"So lets all dive into a moral cesspool and get filthy, to prove that God will forgive us."

That's the whole point of Christianity, isn't it? We're all sinners, we are born sinners, we will die sinners, we are all 'dirty', and the only way any of us get into heaven is by being forgiven.

According to Christianity, we dive into a moral cesspool upon birth.

Strawman again.

dancingqueen
02-17-2014, 10:37 PM
This was just a fluke. I think more people that are of this religious caliber ought to do this.

Bluesky
02-17-2014, 11:03 PM
"So lets all dive into a moral cesspool and get filthy, to prove that God will forgive us."

That's the whole point of Christianity, isn't it? We're all sinners, we are born sinners, we will die sinners, we are all 'dirty', and the only way any of us get into heaven is by being forgiven.

According to Christianity, we dive into a moral cesspool upon birth.

Soc, you are reverting to some cheap diversionary tactics here.

The Left Sock
02-18-2014, 12:17 AM
Really? A cheap diversion?

Are we all not 'born sinners', according to Christianity?

Is the only way into Heaven through 'God's forgiveness', according to Christianity?

If those two statements are true, then it necessarily follows that we all 'dive into a moral cesspool and get filthy upon birth', and the only way out is to be forgiven by God.

I can't help it if you aren't able to recognize the truth of your own faith.

The Left Sock
02-18-2014, 12:47 AM
Anyway, back to the original point. Don't want to encourage the straw-man enthusiasts!

The Bible makes several references to true believers being protected from snakebites. It's there, there is no disputing it.

A pastor took this information literally, got bit, and died.

There can only be two logical conclusions drawn from this information:

1. The pastor wasn't a true believer.

2. The Bible is at least in part, a work of fiction.

Take your pick!

The Berean
02-18-2014, 01:00 AM
No problems here. Your interpretations are your own.

In other words, I can't help it if you aren't able to recognize the truth of our faith. :) :) :)

Aristotle
02-18-2014, 10:37 AM
Anyway, back to the original point. Don't want to encourage the straw-man enthusiasts!

The Bible makes several references to true believers being protected from snakebites. It's there, there is no disputing it.

A pastor took this information literally, got bit, and died.

There can only be two logical conclusions drawn from this information:

1. The pastor wasn't a true believer.

2. The Bible is at least in part, a work of fiction.

Take your pick!

You forgot option 3: The pastor, lacking guidance and relying on his own understanding only, paid a dear price for doing what the Bible says not to do: interpret the Bible on your own

The Berean
02-18-2014, 12:43 PM
.... interpret the Bible on your own

Good thing so very few do.

Aristotle
02-18-2014, 03:50 PM
Good thing so very few do.

All Protestants do, so I'm not sure what you're referring to...unless you do not know what a key basis of Protestantism is.

The Berean
02-20-2014, 10:24 AM
All Protestants do, so I'm not sure what you're referring to...unless you do not know what a key basis of Protestantism is.

Aristotle would have everyone believe that, totally unlike the Roman Catholic Church, Protestantism is fractured into 40,000 different groups that all believe different things.

In fact, there are relatively few denominations that are completely separate. In fact even the most lunatic fringe still believe probably 90 percent of the same things as the rest. The biggest difference between denominations would be chains of authority.

This is why there are so many non-denominational bible schools, and why so many churches swap pastors easily (NOT without recommendations and investigation!!).

The differences are minor issues.

Aristotle
02-20-2014, 10:53 AM
The differences are minor issues.

No, they are not.

But here's one thing you all have in common: Sola Scriptura (yet you deny it)

The Berean
02-20-2014, 11:10 AM
No, they are not.

But here's one thing you all have in common: Sola Scriptura (yet you deny it)

Yes, the differences rarely affect salvation. That would be minor.

And we all accept Sola Scriptura?? OK, but I suspect that is related to the fact that we reject Rome interpreting scripture for us. Not to mention adding to it, which the bible strictly rejects.

Bluesky
02-20-2014, 12:00 PM
Oh Sola mio...

2nd verse, same as the first..
Little bit faster, a little bit worse

Aristotle
02-20-2014, 07:09 PM
Here's where Blue gets nervous ;)

Aristotle
02-20-2014, 07:15 PM
Yes, the differences rarely affect salvation.

You say so. The guy in the next church says maybe. The guy in the next church says it most certainly will.

Welcome to Sola Scriptura :)

And we all accept Sola Scriptura?? OK

Ephesians 4 Refutes the Protestant "Proof Text"
"All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16-17).
This passage doesn't teach formal sufficiency, which excludes a binding, authoritative role for Tradition and the Church. Protestants extrapolate onto the text what isn't there. If we look at the overall context of this passage, we can see that Paul makes reference to oral Tradition three times (cf. 2 Tim. 1:13-14, 2:2, 3:14). And to use an analogy, let's examine a similar passage:

"And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ" (Eph. 4:11-15).
If 2 Timothy 3 proves the sole sufficiency of Scripture, then, by analogy, Ephesians 4 would likewise prove the sufficiency of pastors and teachers for the attainment of Christian perfection. In Ephesians 4, the Christian believer is equipped, built up, brought into unity and mature manhood, and even preserved from doctrinal confusion by means of the teaching function of the Church. This is a far stronger statement of the perfecting of the saints than 2 Timothy 3, yet it does not even mention Scripture.

So if all non-scriptural elements are excluded in 2 Timothy, then, by analogy, Scripture would logically have to be excluded in Ephesians. It is far more reasonable to recognize that the absence of one or more elements in one passage does not mean that they are nonexistent. The Church and Scripture are both equally necessary and important for teaching.

https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7185

Barry Morris
02-20-2014, 07:24 PM
Here's where Blue gets nervous ;)

An attack, dealt with appropriately.

Bluesky
02-20-2014, 09:53 PM
Wait a minute. The Berean is Barry M?
Perhaps I don't know some things, but I don't see Aristotle's remarks as being unusually different. It is quite in character with how he has always argued. Guessing that I am nervous is not an attack. IMO.

dancingqueen
02-21-2014, 01:02 AM
An attack, dealt with appropriately.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA
Looks like someone else got nervous.
:)

see, a smiley, it's okay now....

Barry Morris
02-21-2014, 01:40 PM
The infraction was reversed, at Bluesky's request. Whether admin will reverse the automatic ban is another story.

Oh yes, :) :) :), don't want to forget that!!!

dancingqueen
02-22-2014, 03:33 AM
The infraction was reversed, at Bluesky's request. Whether admin will reverse the automatic ban is another story.

Oh yes, :) :) :), don't want to forget that!!!

Right. I forgot about the automa....

Upper Decker
02-22-2014, 02:38 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/19/us-couple-sent-to-prison-for-2nd-prayer-death/5612317/


http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/21/us/arizona-anti-gay-bill/


I'm curious to why a right to believe in something trumps other peoples rights..

Bluesky
02-22-2014, 02:48 PM
Equality is a myth. But it is a useful and powerfully emotive tool to gain power.
This is about a tectonic shift in culture. Old cultures won't go out easily into the night. They too have a right to rage as they die.
And guess who is gaining power these days?

The Berean
02-22-2014, 02:51 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/19/us-couple-sent-to-prison-for-2nd-prayer-death/5612317/


http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/21/us/arizona-anti-gay-bill/


I'm curious to why a right to believe in something trumps other peoples rights..

It should not. If they lost the rest of their kids to Childrens Aid, I would see no problem.

"You've killed two of your children ... not God, not your church, not religious devotion you," Philadelphia Common Pleas Judge Benjamin Lerner said."

The Berean
02-22-2014, 02:54 PM
Question. If a person walks into your store, how do you tell their orientation??

Upper Decker
02-22-2014, 03:20 PM
Equality is a myth. But it is a useful and powerfully emotive tool to gain power.



So from this you are saying that there should not be equality amongst man? And that faith trumps all? And wanting equality for all is nothing more than a manipulative tool to further an agenda?


As for the other - " How does one determine ones sexual orientation by vision alone?".


That right there opens a whole can of worms now. Now one can discriminate based on any idiotic reason they want , and claim they believed they going against their beliefs.

Bluesky
02-22-2014, 03:46 PM
No, I am not saying that at all. I think that given human nature, equality is impossible to attain.
I am discriminated against every day because I don't earn six figures.
I am not treated equally to the privileged 1 %.
And I never will be. That's human nature, and I have to live with it.
I don't believe I said anything about the power of faith.

I have some thoughts about it, but I don't want to roil you any more than you are.
Outrage is so deadening. It pounds the same drum all the time. Outrage is not very creative.

The Berean
02-22-2014, 04:48 PM
Avoids the problem.

Anapeg
02-22-2014, 04:59 PM
Indignant outrage trumps all. Just sayin'.

The Berean
02-22-2014, 05:03 PM
Indignant outrage trumps all. Just sayin'.

For "indignant" also read "self-righteous" !!!

Anapeg
02-22-2014, 05:06 PM
Not to high jack but in the vein of the OP, why is it so much easier to believe some superior entity created all we see, all that came before as opposed to we came from a single cell over millions of years evolution to be where we are to-day?

The Berean
02-22-2014, 06:09 PM
Not to high jack but in the vein of the OP, why is it so much easier to believe some superior entity created all we see, all that came before as opposed to we came from a single cell over millions of years evolution to be where we are to-day?

Where did the cell come from?? Where did the natural laws governing it's growth come from?? Where did the environment allowing it's growth come from??

The Berean
02-22-2014, 06:11 PM
...As for the other - " How does one determine ones sexual orientation by vision alone?".


That right there opens a whole can of worms now. Now one can discriminate based on any idiotic reason they want , and claim they believed they going against their beliefs.

But how does one tell??

Anapeg
02-22-2014, 07:15 PM
Where did the cell come from?? Where did the natural laws governing it's growth come from?? Where did the environment allowing it's growth come from??

1-Where did the cell come from?? It has been "proven" or was it speculation, my mind is a mess but the gist was life has been/will be found I believe in/on meteorite, meteors, whatever.
2- Where did the natural laws governing it's growth come from?? Natural laws came from, wait for it , nature.
3- Where did the environment allowing it's growth come from?? I have read some but watched more on the subject of weather and how it came to be from a bad atmosphere to what we have now. The major kudos goes to the flora that spawned.

The Berean
02-22-2014, 07:23 PM
1-Where did the cell come from?? It has been "proven" or was it speculation, my mind is a mess but the gist was life has been/will be found I believe in/on meteorite, meteors, whatever.
2- Where did the natural laws governing it's growth come from?? Natural laws came from, wait for it , nature.
3- Where did the environment allowing it's growth come from?? I have read some but watched more on the subject of weather and how it came to be from a bad atmosphere to what we have now. The major kudos goes to the flora that spawned.

1: Your answer only backs up the question one step. We're after origins.
2: Same answer
3: Same answer

Anapeg
02-22-2014, 08:07 PM
1: Your answer only backs up the question one step. We're after origins.
2: Same answer
3: Same answer

Now, at this point you hark back to my OP that still has not an honest, to the point answer. Why, just a simple why, do you believe as you do and I believe as I do. I was raised as yourself, a Christian and somewhere along the line I diverged yet you have stayed the course. I argue not what we believe but more "why" we believe. I say I had my eyes opened and after having my life experiences chose my path. You lived your life and chose your path. Is one stronger or weaker than the other? I have faith in hands on visible science and you have your Bible, with the Bible being the largest difference. You see an individual to be the reason and I see nature, luck if you will. While seemingly separated by light years we are in fact cheek by jowl if one looks. Most of my stripe might concede the need for a flash point, an ignition source BUT not to the extent you subscribe to.

Bluesky
02-22-2014, 08:25 PM
So from this you are saying that there should not be equality amongst man? And that faith trumps all? And wanting equality for all is nothing more than a manipulative tool to further an agenda?


As for the other - " How does one determine ones sexual orientation by vision alone?".


That right there opens a whole can of worms now. Now one can discriminate based on any idiotic reason they want , and claim they believed they going against their beliefs.

Here's another group that will soon be granted equality. And the gays said this would never happen because after all, the slippery slope argument is fallacious. But here we are, half way down that slope and its getting greasier.

I really think that polyamory for me is an orientation, like being heterosexual or homosexual. (http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/02/up-for-polyamory-creating-alternatives-to-marriage/283920/)

Upper Decker
02-22-2014, 10:58 PM
I don't get why one should be judged based on one's sexual orientation, or where you believe your faith in your god gives you the right to discriminate. What gets someone off shouldn't be anyone's concern providing they everyone is an adult and consenting.


I thought it was up to your God to do the judging - not the followers? Shouldn't you guys just be going about your business knowing they are going to apparently burn in hell for their apparent misdoings. Given that its ok, do you judge other people of other faiths in the same pool of contempt?

The Berean
02-22-2014, 11:09 PM
I don't get why one should be judged based on one's sexual orientation, or where you believe your faith in your god gives you the right to discriminate. What gets someone off shouldn't be anyone's concern providing they everyone is an adult and consenting.


I thought it was up to your God to do the judging - not the followers? Shouldn't you guys just be going about your business knowing they are going to apparently burn in hell for their apparent misdoings. Given that its ok, do you judge other people of other faiths in the same pool of contempt?

Why do you see it that way?? Do you think I never speak to my gay friends again after I find out their sexual preferences?? Why do you think that I condemn people who think differently??

In other words, who are you to judge me, when in fact you don't really know what I believe or think??

Bluesky
02-22-2014, 11:53 PM
I don't get why one should be judged based on one's sexual orientation, or where you believe your faith in your god gives you the right to discriminate. What gets someone off shouldn't be anyone's concern providing they everyone is an adult and consenting.


I thought it was up to your God to do the judging - not the followers? Shouldn't you guys just be going about your business knowing they are going to apparently burn in hell for their apparent misdoings. Given that its ok, do you judge other people of other faiths in the same pool of contempt?


Who is judging? Huh? HUH?I

dancingqueen
02-23-2014, 12:07 AM
Why do you see it that way?? Do you think I never speak to my gay friends again after I find out their sexual preferences??

No, I'm certain you don't stop talking to them, though I'm sure they would wish you would.
I know your type, comments you think are subtle but aren't about how they should just change their orientation or condescending remarks like praying for them to find the "right" (member of opposite sex)

The Berean
02-23-2014, 09:14 AM
No, I'm certain you don't stop talking to them, though I'm sure they would wish you would.
I know your type, comments you think are subtle but aren't about how they should just change their orientation or condescending remarks like praying for them to find the "right" (member of opposite sex)

Absolutely, just the way I accosted you, and got in your face at those coffee meets years ago!!!

In other words, you know nothing!!!

dancingqueen
02-23-2014, 10:03 AM
Absolutely, just the way I accosted you, and got in your face at those coffee meets years ago!!!

In other words, you know nothing!!!

Like I said, subtle... I mean you think you where subtle, but you weren't.

The Berean
02-23-2014, 10:16 AM
Like I said, subtle... I mean you think you where subtle, but you weren't.

Oh.

As I recall, it was "Hi, *****', and nothing more.

If that's being subtle, then, DAMN, I'm good!!