Black pastors bash NAACP for endorsing gay marriage

[Reba]

Ok, don't let girl being hard on you.

Good night.

Thanks. I went straight to bed after my last post. I'm kind of awake now.

 

[Reba]

Maybe. Or Maybe not.

Again, when men acted against God's law and His plans for them the results were disastrous. Time and again, this is what the Bible shows us.

 

[Reba]

Were they? Or were they preaching the "Sons of Hamm"?

Another case of "mainline" churches changing an interpretation of a Bible passage to fit current society. If society wanted to support slavery, then they would find a verse to somehow fit that support. That's backwards interpretation of the Bible, and is totally wrong. Other church pastors actively supported the abolition movement, even where it wasn't popular.

 

[Reba]

yes I agree. the cancer of the humanity... like bigotry and ignorance

So, in a regression, the cancer of humanity (bigotry and ignorance) fades away. In a progression, the cancer (bigotry and ignorance) spreads.

the more humanity progresses, the less regressive cancer is.

Think about what you just stated. That means, the less that the cancer of bigotry and ignorance fades. Which means, the bigotry and ignorance don't fade.

we surely did come a long way in short time where people like Galileo Galilei get punished for questioning Church and God over things that are easily scientifically explained.

That was the action of one religion's leaders (who themselves weren't even unanimously against Galileo).

 

[Reba]

because Church used to forbid interracial marriages and refused to marry interracial couples.

Some churches did. Not all. As far as performing weddings, that's up to each pastor to decide.

as you said.... Bible is infallible but human's understanding of it is fallible.

Sadly, yes.

 

[deafironchef]

All authors were men, not women. Right? Obviously at those times the women were not treated equally.

that not true , look at rehab , from harlot to risk her life from king to save two Hebrew man in harlot house . at end , she and her family was save from perish from battle .....

 

[Berry]

Why are you even mentioning interracial marriages? The Bible doesn't say there's anything wrong with interracial marriages, and neither do I. So?

The Bible very definitely says that a believer should not marry an unbeliever.

The Bible very clearly states that marriage is for one man and one woman. Also according to the Bible, any sexual relationship outside of the marriage of that one man and that one woman is sin.

Maybe. Or Maybe not.

Again, when men acted against God's law and His plans for them the results were disastrous. Time and again, this is what the Bible shows us.

But as my link points out -- Sex outside of the current definition of marriage is not against God's law. Solomon did not anger God until -- Even with wives and 700 concubines -- he murdered a man to obtain his ONLY wife.

 

[Reba]

But as my link points out -- Sex outside of the current definition of marriage is not against God's law.

It most certainly is. Fornication is still a sin.

Solomon did not anger God until -- Even with wives and 700 concubines -- he murdered a man to obtain his ONLY wife.

I'm afraid you have either misunderstood what happened, or you chose to mislead with your statement.

 

[Foxrac]

If marriage is just for love....as you say... what is the point of a license?

I want marriage jointly with partner because of tax purpose and benefits.

 

[caz12]

that fair enough reason forax

 

[Reba]

I want marriage jointly with partner because of tax purpose and benefits.

Suppose the current IRS code was changed, and they got rid of the married category for taxes. Also suppose that all financial benefits for married persons was eliminated. Would that make a difference? Just curious.

 

[Foxrac]

Suppose the current IRS code was changed, and they got rid of the married category for taxes. Also suppose that all financial benefits for married persons was eliminated. Would that make a difference? Just curious.

Why are you ask me a hard question?

The marriage is still about love.

I doubt about taxes or benefits will be change in anytime.

 

[Jiro]

So, in a regression, the cancer of humanity (bigotry and ignorance) fades away. In a progression, the cancer (bigotry and ignorance) spreads.


Think about what you just stated. That means, the less that the cancer of bigotry and ignorance fades. Which means, the bigotry and ignorance don't fade.


That was the action of one religion's leaders (who themselves weren't even unanimously against Galileo).

that's not what I said.

What I said is this.... as the humanity progresses as we're becoming more unified and understanding, the less bigotry and ignorance there are.

 

[Jiro]

Suppose the current IRS code was changed, and they got rid of the married category for taxes. Also suppose that all financial benefits for married persons was eliminated. Would that make a difference? Just curious.

I see where you're going with this but that's not true for most cases. Like heterosexual couples, gay people want the same thing too for same reasons.

 

[rockin'robin]

do they know you are against gay marriage?

They never asked and we never discussed their lifestyle, obviously, it was apparent about them tho'....and they lived together. I have and always will be nice to people regardless to their color or lifestyle, as long as they are nice and respect my lifestyle also. I'm not about asking what anyone does in their bedroom.

 

[Reba]

I see where you're going with this but that's not true for most cases. Like heterosexual couples, gay people want the same thing too for same reasons.

Just curious. Some have said that marriage is all about love, some said it's about children, some said it's about legal rights, etc. Apparently there is no consensus about what marriage means.

 

[deafskeptic]

But as my link points out -- Sex outside of the current definition of marriage is not against God's law. Solomon did not anger God until -- Even with wives and 700 concubines -- he murdered a man to obtain his ONLY wife.

Murder is certainly an outrageous act. Yet some people seem to think certain sexual acts are a worse sin than murder.

If you ask me, such people's morals have gone seriously awry and that they can not accept their own latent homosexuality - much less others' homosexuality. To me, a life is much more sacrosanct than any sexual act that they preform with those that they cherish.

 

[TXgolfer]

I want marriage jointly with partner because of tax purpose and benefits.

A civil union covers that

 

[Foxrac]

A civil union covers that

No, do not treat me as second class citizen!

 

[Reba]

Murder is certainly an outrageous act. Yet some people seem to think certain sexual acts are a worse sin than murder....

I don't know about other people but I've never said that "certain sexual acts are a worse sin than murder."

This thread started out about same-sex marriage, and then moved into interracial marriage and shrimp eating, then Galileo, and now you're including murder.

Time to refocus.