KIT, Keith, Keith, Keith,
Let's look at this a bit more closely. Matthew 10:5: It says "What God has joined together......" I see no mention of specific genders. Interestingly enough that particular verse is commonly used to "prove" divorce is a sin by the Catholic Curch as well as others. Corinthians 1:7 dosen't say jack-shit about marriage. All the verses you quote have to do with how to treat each other as a married couple. No mention of genders. Actually , most of this area of the Bible is usually used as a rationalization for women to be controlled by men. Ephesians 5:21:23 "You wives must sunbit to your husbands leadership in the same way you submit to the Lord. For a husband is in charge of his wife in the same way Christ is in charge of his body the church. So you wives must willingly obey your husbands in everything, just as the church obeys Christ." End quote. It don't work friend, tried MANY times to tell my first wife that I was God so far as she was concerned. She wasn't buying that. C'mon, damn near anything can be "proven" or at least rationalized by the Bible if you try hard enough. What? You didn't think I had a Bible and could read? On May 16, 9:51 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > Holly, Holly, Holly, > > I have already given the verses that point out why the Old Testament is not > to be taken literally, and why all of these Moonbats who sling up Biblical > verses from the Old Testament as if Christians are somehow facing a dilemma > or a conundrum are misplaced. > > If you are referring to the verses which demonstrate that marriage is > between a man and a woman, here are a few: > > "So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, > let man not separate" (Matthew 19:6). > > There are several epistles written by the apostle Paul that refer to > marriage and how believers are to operate within the marriage relationship. > One such passage is 1 Corinthians chapter 7, and another is Ephesians > 5:22-33. When studied together, these two passages provide biblical > principles that form a framework for a God-pleasing marriage relationship. > > "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself > up for her" (Ephesians 5:25). "In this same way, husbands ought to love > their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After > all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as > Christ does the church” (Ephesians 5:28-29). “For this reason a man will > leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will > become one flesh” (Ephesians 5:31). > > In Hebrews 13:4; "Give honor to marriage, and remain faithful to one another > in marriage. God will surely judge people who are immoral and those who > commit adultery." > > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Hollywood > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > KIT, > > > So, give me the verse in the New testament that supports your > > position. I can wait while you ask J.C. as neither one of us are Bible > > scholars. > > > We both realise i'm sure that people on the both sides use the Bible > > to justify their political/social attitudes and cheerfully ignore what > > it says when convient. You in this case seem to want to use it to > > justify your position. All i'm asking is for the verse(s) in said > > Bible your using as your authority. > > > On May 16, 8:55 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Holly, > > > > First, J.C. is literally much more qualified than I, to discuss various > > > aspects of the Bible!! I am a rookie as compared to her, and although I > > > don't always agree with J.C. in her viewpoints, I concede that she is far > > > more qualified to talk about Biblical passages than I!! > > > > A couple of points: > > > > First, the reason that I even delved into the New Testament, is because > > > there is this trend by far left extremists to sling up passages from the > > Old > > > Testament, which are conflicting, sound hateful, and provide a conundrum > > if > > > one were to take the passages literally. My point in citing the New > > > Covenants, was to demostrate that nothing in the Old Testament is to be > > > taken literally, as per Christ's words. Christ explicitly preached: the > > > spiritual equality of men and women but not of violently overthrowing > > human > > > practices that differentiate male and female roles. Christ preached a > > high > > > degree of tolerance and non-judgment. > > > > Nevertheless, as stated, (and I see that you just posted again, so I > > don't > > > mean to be redundant) marriage is clearly between a man and a woman. > > > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Hollywood <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > KIT, > > > > > Blah, blah, blah, so give me a verse in the New Testament that > > > > actually defines/describes marriage so I can find a Bible and read it. > > > > There must be at least one. After all ,Jesus's first public miracle > > > > was turning water into wine at a wedding. > > > > > On May 15, 10:18 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hey J.C.!! > > > > > > (LOL, Here We Go Again!!) > > > > > > First, I am not a Biblical scholar, as you are!! Having said that, > > I > > > > note > > > > > that you only reference the Old Jewish Testament, and not the New > > > > > Covenants, Christians believe Christ released them from the bonds of > > > > strict > > > > > adherence to the Old Testament Law and superimposed God's judgment > > with > > > > > Grace. For those who read the Old testament and find harshness, this > > > > means > > > > > the New covenant supersedes anything in the Old Testament. > > > > > > Moreover, Jesus Christ told us that the whole law, *e.g.;* the "Old > > > > > Testament" could be summarized in two commands: "*Love God with all > > your > > > > > heart, soul and mind*"; and "*Love your neighbor as yourself*" *See* > > > > Luke > > > > > 12:28-32. > > > > > Further, Christ also taught us that, “*B**ecause this is my blood of > > the > > > > > new covenant that is being poured out for many people for the > > > > forgiveness of > > > > > sins*.” (*See* Matthew 26:28); and. “*For if there had been nothing > > wrong > > > > > with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for > > another*.” > > > > * > > > > > See* Hebrews 8:7; and, “*By calling this covenant "new," he has made > > the > > > > > first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon > > disappear*.” > > > > * > > > > > See* Hebrews 8:13. > > > > > > From our messages back in February of this year: > > > > > > With purposeful , extensive, methodical propaganda, planning, massive > > > > > amounts of funding by the likes of George Soros, Hollywood elitists > > and > > > > > others, and with controlled, extensive media manipulation, it is my > > > > opinion > > > > > that you, and many Americans have been intentionally misled and > > mislead. > > > > > There has been a concerted effort by a select hard core group of > > > > socialists > > > > > and secularists, who want to destroy the traditional values of this > > > > Nation, > > > > > the very core values that made this Nation great. > > > > > > By example, there is no other definition of and for marriage, other > > than > > > > the > > > > > term's religious connotation. The premise that there is some kind > > of > > > > > "civil definition" of marriage is incorrect. Marriage is in total, > > an > > > > > ecclesiastical function; marriage always has been and continues to > > be. > > > > If > > > > > one studies the history of marriage in this Nation, the several > > States > > > > got > > > > > involved in the contract of "Marriage", only because of the conflict > > of > > > > > varying religious tenets, and in part, to regulate miscegenation back > > in > > > > the > > > > > early to mid nineteenth century. As stated, marriage is now, and has > > > > always > > > > > been between a man and a woman, and this is at the very core of > > > > traditional > > > > > values in western civilization. The definition of marriage extends > > > > > throughout recorded history of western civilization. > > > > > > The term, "same sex marriage" is an oxymoron, there can be no such > > thing, > > > > > without literally changing the definition of marriage. That is the > > goal > > > > of > > > > > these socialists and secularists; e.g.; to redefine the definition of > > > > > marriage. This would be the equivalent of changing the definition > > of > > > > > "Murder", or "giraffe"; or any other noun, adjective or adverb. > > > > > > Despite the concept that many individuals and entities are trying to > > sell > > > > > the American public, (including Mags, and this Moonbat "ThosPayne) in > > his > > > > > article that Mags posted captioned: "When Same-Sex Marriage Was a > > > > Christian > > > > > Rite") most of which are from socialist-elitist movements here in > > the > > > > > United States, and in this particular case, e.g.; the push for "gay > > > > > marriage"; it is the militant gay movements within the United States, > > > > that > > > > > has, and attempts to portray any individual that is opposed to gay > > > > marriage > > > > > as somehow being bigoted, and equivalent to being racist, comparing > > > > > themselves to the black community and the black leadership that > > pushed > > > > for > > > > > racial equality who were treated unjustly during the mid to late 20th > > > > > century. > > > > > > It is not discriminatory for Americans to be opposed to, and > > rejecting > > > > same > > > > > sex marriages as being a part of normal, mainstream behavior > > > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:58 PM, J.C. <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Oh, are we back to the biblical definition of marriage? Would that > > be > > > > > > Abraham taking his handmaiden? Jacob and his two wives? Lot's > > > > > > daughters getting him drunk and sleeping with him? David having > > the > > > > > > husband of the woman he wanted killed? All the other plural > > marriages > > > > > > and concubines that show up? Or are we talking about the property > > > > > > aspect of it? > > > > > > > Come on, Baby...you can do better than that. > > > > > > > On May 15, 8:35 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > The term, "Gay Marriage" or "Same Sex Marriage" is an oxymoron, > > but > > > > we > > > > > > have > > > > > > > been down this road before J.C.!!! > > > > > > > > (LOL!!) > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:29 PM, J.C. <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > You can look, but don't touch. > > > > > > > > > On May 15, 8:20 pm, SgtUSMC <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Well, I'm sure she practices abstinence, at least. > > > > > > > > > > On May 15, 9:53 pm, "J.C." <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Ms. Rambo? I don't think so. She is nothing more than a > > > > hypocrite > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > the highest order. It is alright for her to pose semi-nude > > and > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > prance around in a bikini while her chosen party tells all > > the > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > > > girls how modest they should be, just > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
