I told him my name 5 times and he still doesn't know it.
It's easier to type out "Aaron" than it is "Gianfranco".
I told him my name 5 times and he still doesn't know it.
(Sandy's just mad because she didn't get an award...although
"The TOLer most ashamed that she voted for the baby murdereing-sodomite loving-Marxist B. Hussein Obama" does have a nice ring to it).
He knows my name!!! :hetro: :BRAVO:It's easier to type out "Aaron" than it is "Gianfranco".
Lobster eaters like aCW just don't get it.I told him my name 5 times and he still doesn't know it.
Sadly, they have Paul's word on it that Leviticus is dead except for the law against homosexuality. lain:Lobster eaters like aCW just don't get it.
Imo they must all be criminalised for the sake of decent non-lobster eating folk, who should not be forced to witness disgusting scenes of these deviants and perverts publically eating lobster, or be taught in our schools that the eating of lobster is somehow normal. :AMR:
Sadly, they have Paul's word on it that Leviticus is dead except for the lawagainsthomosexualitysexual sins lain:
I understand the difference between dietary laws and Kantian Universalism. :AMR1:Quote:
Originally Posted by alwight
Lobster eaters like aCW just don't get it.
Imo they must all be criminalised for the sake of decent non-lobster eating folk, who should not be forced to witness disgusting scenes of these deviants and perverts publically eating lobster, or be taught in our schools that the eating of lobster is somehow normal.
Fixed that for ya.
And tell us why God abhors sexual sins GFR7, i.e. adultery, incest, bestiality, and why those laws are a part of His universal moral code (lovemeorhateme aka Pete needs to know).
Then Paul is just their fig leaf for what is, after all, the evil perversion and abomination of shellfish eating as defined clearly in Leviticus and is therefore, apparently, the literal word of God for both Jew and Gentile.Sadly, they have Paul's word on it that Leviticus is dead except for the law against homosexuality. lain:
I understand the difference between dietary laws and Kantian Universalism. :AMR1:
Why ancient, prehistorical theologies and culture MUST be criminalized!
Homosexuality, eating shellfish, planting a field with alternating crops, having two or more different fabrics in an article of clothing, etc.
Are ALL ABOMINATIONS
They were promulgated by primitive tribes long before the concepts of human rights, democracy, fairness, or respect were the same as they are today.
If you are going to label homosexuality as an "abomination," then at least be biblically consistent about it.
No more going to Red Lobster after church, people.
Lobster eaters like aCW just don't get it.
Imo they must all be criminalised for the sake of decent non-lobster eating folk, who should not be forced to witness disgusting scenes of these deviants and perverts publically eating lobster, or be taught in our schools that the eating of lobster is somehow normal. :AMR:
Yet only one of those is a sin. The ceremonial law was given to the Jews, it doesn't apply to us today. The moral part of the law still very much applies. This includes the ten commandments along with sexual prohibitions against homosexuality, incest and beastiality.
So I'll continue to enjoy my shellfish and pork chops, thanks.
I get suspicious when I read phrases like this:
"Moreover, it is the presence of this self-governing reason in each person that Kant thought offered decisive grounds for viewing each as possessed of equal worth and deserving of equal respect."
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/
(I didn't see any mention of God in that article GFR7).
But then we've seen who you get your moral guidelines from...
IIRC all "Kantian Universalism" means is that morals are applying across the board.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aikido7
Why ancient, prehistorical theologies and culture MUST be criminalized!
Homosexuality, eating shellfish, planting a field with alternating crops, having two or more different fabrics in an article of clothing, etc.
Are ALL ABOMINATIONS
They were promulgated by primitive tribes long before the concepts of human rights, democracy, fairness, or respect were the same as they are today.
If you are going to label homosexuality as an "abomination," then at least be biblically consistent about it.
No more going to Red Lobster after church, people.
Good post Pete, especially the part I put in bold. Now you know (through your own words) why righteous God-fearing societies have always criminalized sexual sins (as seen throughout this 3 part thread, when sexual sins are decriminalized, they play havoc on society).
Isn't God's Word an amazing thing?
Maybe I should clarify that what I just said does not mean I believe that Biblical law should be the law of the land. I do not support theocracy.
God's law and man's law are very different. Homosexuality is a sin against God, not a sin against one's fellow man.
God's word is amazing. It's just a shame you ignore chunks of it, something which is obvious from the way you speak to others.
What is government's role in a righteous society? (i.e. a society that God approves of).
If by "government" you mean the State, its role should be to die and stay dead.
Where are my manners Al? I forgot to mention your award:
The award for the guy who has lived almost 20 years longer than the average life expectancy...
Yet only one of those is a sin. The ceremonial law was given to the Jews, it doesn't apply to us today. The moral part of the law still very much applies. This includes the ten commandments along with sexual prohibitions against homosexuality, incest and beastiality.
So I'll continue to enjoy my shellfish and pork chops, thanks.