If your church's doctrine says homosexuality is a sin, but your DC is gay

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your son must live a chaste life; this is a burden but his suffering is a special offering.

So you think her son should live a life without love and happiness..this is awful. It is no wonder that teen suicide rates among LGBTQ youth are so high - people like you contribute massively to this, you should be ashamed of yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have family visiting, sorry I’m not here 24/7 like you.

It’s very well known that Jesus radicalized as he went on. You didn’t know this? Oh right, you know almost nothing about Christianity besides what you read on atheist, Jewish or fringy sites.

But how like you to try to declare “victory” when people get sick of you—I’ve seen this happen so often on DCUM, as if wearing people out with dumb arguments and repetition somehow constitutes “victory.” You’re sad.

I don’t see this as as “victory/loss” situation. If I did I would declare victory because since you can’t answer my arguments, you have lowered yourself to ad hominem attack. But this is not about winning and losing. It’s about how to get people to relegate Leviticus 18:22 to the trash bin of history so we don’t have posters telling OP that her child must live a celibate life. That issue obviously doesn’t bother you.

I responded to your question (Jesus' message got more radical later in his career) and you haven't even tried to answer that. Instead you insult me.

Yes, you did try to declare "victory." There's somebody in this forum who does this A LOT, complete with spin that twists everything, and I'm guessing it's you. It's really immature, childish, puerile, and any other adjectives you want to apply that aren't ad homimens because they're true.

Finally, you're STILL confused about the role of Leviticus. The vast majority of Christians have ALREADY relegated it to the dustbin of history, which is EXACTLY why the majority of us think those who go gback to selectively pull out 18:22 are hypocritical. What you're still doing -- trying to say that parts of Leviticus like the dietary rules are still value--is completely pointless and undermines our shared effort to relegate Leviticus etc. etc.

Sory for the bold caps, but in your case it seems necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have family visiting, sorry I’m not here 24/7 like you.

It’s very well known that Jesus radicalized as he went on. You didn’t know this? Oh right, you know almost nothing about Christianity besides what you read on atheist, Jewish or fringy sites.

But how like you to try to declare “victory” when people get sick of you—I’ve seen this happen so often on DCUM, as if wearing people out with dumb arguments and repetition somehow constitutes “victory.” You’re sad.

I don’t see this as as “victory/loss” situation. If I did I would declare victory because since you can’t answer my arguments, you have lowered yourself to ad hominem attack. But this is not about winning and losing. It’s about how to get people to relegate Leviticus 18:22 to the trash bin of history so we don’t have posters telling OP that her child must live a celibate life. That issue obviously doesn’t bother you.

I responded to your question (Jesus' message got more radical later in his career) and you haven't even tried to answer that. Instead you insult me.

Yes, you did try to declare "victory." There's somebody in this forum who does this A LOT, complete with spin that twists everything, and I'm guessing it's you. It's really immature, childish, puerile, and any other adjectives you want to apply that aren't ad homimens because they're true.

Finally, you're STILL confused about the role of Leviticus. The vast majority of Christians have ALREADY relegated it to the dustbin of history, which is EXACTLY why the majority of us think those who go gback to selectively pull out 18:22 are hypocritical. What you're still doing -- trying to say that parts of Leviticus like the dietary rules are still value--is completely pointless and undermines our shared effort to relegate Leviticus etc. etc.

Sory for the bold caps, but in your case it seems necessary.

Fine, I’ll answer it. I presume you’re attempting to quote Matthew 22: 36-40. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022%3A36-40&version=NIV Jesus’ disciples ask him what is the most important commandment in the Law. Jesus answers in one of the few remaining Hebrew passages “v’ahavtah et Adonai elohecha, v’chol levovacha, u’v’chol navshecha, u’v’chol meodecha.” This means “thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind.” Jesus was quoting Deuteronomy 6:5. That was the most important prayer in Judaism at that time and it still is. Nothing radical about it. Jesus then says that the second most important passage is “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” Jesus was quoting Leviticus 19:18 and 19:34. Jesus was quoting what were at the time and what are to this day the most important Jewish prayer and the most important Jewish commandment. Quoting Leviticus certainly does not eliminate Leviticus. There is nothing radical here. Jesus was quoting what have always been the two most important passages in Judaism.

In the first century B.C., a young gentile man came to Rabbi Hillel, often considered the greatest rabbi of all time, and asked Hillel to teach him all of Judaism while the young man stood on one foot. Hillel answered “do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you. That is all. All the rest is commentary.” Hillel, an expert in Leviticus and an advocate of strict obedience to the Law, certainly did not mean to abrogate Leviticus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your son must live a chaste life; this is a burden but his suffering is a special offering.

This is exactly what I’m talking about. Unfortunately, Leviticus 18:22 is alive and well and, unfortunately, many Christians want to close their eyes to this sad fact.

You don't even need to go to Levitical law to justify this. God's law is self evident at creation when he made Adam and Eve.

A lot of people who have acquired disordered passions have to (or should, rather) deny themselves. It's not some horrific suffering unique to homosexuality, sorry folks. Love your kid, but you have to be on God's side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your son must live a chaste life; this is a burden but his suffering is a special offering.

So you think her son should live a life without love and happiness..this is awful. It is no wonder that teen suicide rates among LGBTQ youth are so high - people like you contribute massively to this, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Love and happiness will never come from homosexual congress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your son must live a chaste life; this is a burden but his suffering is a special offering.

So you think her son should live a life without love and happiness..this is awful. It is no wonder that teen suicide rates among LGBTQ youth are so high - people like you contribute massively to this, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Love and happiness will never come from homosexual congress.

Are you a troll?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have family visiting, sorry I’m not here 24/7 like you.

It’s very well known that Jesus radicalized as he went on. You didn’t know this? Oh right, you know almost nothing about Christianity besides what you read on atheist, Jewish or fringy sites.

But how like you to try to declare “victory” when people get sick of you—I’ve seen this happen so often on DCUM, as if wearing people out with dumb arguments and repetition somehow constitutes “victory.” You’re sad.

I don’t see this as as “victory/loss” situation. If I did I would declare victory because since you can’t answer my arguments, you have lowered yourself to ad hominem attack. But this is not about winning and losing. It’s about how to get people to relegate Leviticus 18:22 to the trash bin of history so we don’t have posters telling OP that her child must live a celibate life. That issue obviously doesn’t bother you.

I responded to your question (Jesus' message got more radical later in his career) and you haven't even tried to answer that. Instead you insult me.

Yes, you did try to declare "victory." There's somebody in this forum who does this A LOT, complete with spin that twists everything, and I'm guessing it's you. It's really immature, childish, puerile, and any other adjectives you want to apply that aren't ad homimens because they're true.

Finally, you're STILL confused about the role of Leviticus. The vast majority of Christians have ALREADY relegated it to the dustbin of history, which is EXACTLY why the majority of us think those who go gback to selectively pull out 18:22 are hypocritical. What you're still doing -- trying to say that parts of Leviticus like the dietary rules are still value--is completely pointless and undermines our shared effort to relegate Leviticus etc. etc.

Sory for the bold caps, but in your case it seems necessary.

Fine, I’ll answer it. I presume you’re attempting to quote Matthew 22: 36-40. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022%3A36-40&version=NIV Jesus’ disciples ask him what is the most important commandment in the Law. Jesus answers in one of the few remaining Hebrew passages “v’ahavtah et Adonai elohecha, v’chol levovacha, u’v’chol navshecha, u’v’chol meodecha.” This means “thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind.” Jesus was quoting Deuteronomy 6:5. That was the most important prayer in Judaism at that time and it still is. Nothing radical about it. Jesus then says that the second most important passage is “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” Jesus was quoting Leviticus 19:18 and 19:34. Jesus was quoting what were at the time and what are to this day the most important Jewish prayer and the most important Jewish commandment. Quoting Leviticus certainly does not eliminate Leviticus. There is nothing radical here. Jesus was quoting what have always been the two most important passages in Judaism.

In the first century B.C., a young gentile man came to Rabbi Hillel, often considered the greatest rabbi of all time, and asked Hillel to teach him all of Judaism while the young man stood on one foot. Hillel answered “do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you. That is all. All the rest is commentary.” Hillel, an expert in Leviticus and an advocate of strict obedience to the Law, certainly did not mean to abrogate Leviticus.

While the quotes from Matthew are correct (even without your Hebrew), you selectively cut off what Jesus said next. From King James:

Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

So, as Christian ministers explain this, Jesus dodged the trick question and still managed to keep two (only) passages from Leviticus. Christians do follow the 10 commandments from Exodus and the book they call Deuteronomy.

Rabbi Hillel is obviously from a different faith and he's talking about "do unto others" not "love your neighbor", so your comparison to Jesus is off.

Furthermore, it's still baffling why you insist all Christians should follow Leviticus. What's it to you? It's so weird when people from one faith try to tell others how to practice their faiths. Especially when you're obsessively supporting the homophobe position that Leviticus is valid for Christians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I have family visiting, sorry I’m not here 24/7 like you.

It’s very well known that Jesus radicalized as he went on. You didn’t know this? Oh right, you know almost nothing about Christianity besides what you read on atheist, Jewish or fringy sites.

But how like you to try to declare “victory” when people get sick of you—I’ve seen this happen so often on DCUM, as if wearing people out with dumb arguments and repetition somehow constitutes “victory.” You’re sad.

I don’t see this as as “victory/loss” situation. If I did I would declare victory because since you can’t answer my arguments, you have lowered yourself to ad hominem attack. But this is not about winning and losing. It’s about how to get people to relegate Leviticus 18:22 to the trash bin of history so we don’t have posters telling OP that her child must live a celibate life. That issue obviously doesn’t bother you.

I responded to your question (Jesus' message got more radical later in his career) and you haven't even tried to answer that. Instead you insult me.

Yes, you did try to declare "victory." There's somebody in this forum who does this A LOT, complete with spin that twists everything, and I'm guessing it's you. It's really immature, childish, puerile, and any other adjectives you want to apply that aren't ad homimens because they're true.

Finally, you're STILL confused about the role of Leviticus. The vast majority of Christians have ALREADY relegated it to the dustbin of history, which is EXACTLY why the majority of us think those who go gback to selectively pull out 18:22 are hypocritical. What you're still doing -- trying to say that parts of Leviticus like the dietary rules are still value--is completely pointless and undermines our shared effort to relegate Leviticus etc. etc.

Sory for the bold caps, but in your case it seems necessary.

Fine, I’ll answer it. I presume you’re attempting to quote Matthew 22: 36-40. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022%3A36-40&version=NIV Jesus’ disciples ask him what is the most important commandment in the Law. Jesus answers in one of the few remaining Hebrew passages “v’ahavtah et Adonai elohecha, v’chol levovacha, u’v’chol navshecha, u’v’chol meodecha.” This means “thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind.” Jesus was quoting Deuteronomy 6:5. That was the most important prayer in Judaism at that time and it still is. Nothing radical about it. Jesus then says that the second most important passage is “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” Jesus was quoting Leviticus 19:18 and 19:34. Jesus was quoting what were at the time and what are to this day the most important Jewish prayer and the most important Jewish commandment. Quoting Leviticus certainly does not eliminate Leviticus. There is nothing radical here. Jesus was quoting what have always been the two most important passages in Judaism.

In the first century B.C., a young gentile man came to Rabbi Hillel, often considered the greatest rabbi of all time, and asked Hillel to teach him all of Judaism while the young man stood on one foot. Hillel answered “do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you. That is all. All the rest is commentary.” Hillel, an expert in Leviticus and an advocate of strict obedience to the Law, certainly did not mean to abrogate Leviticus.

While the quotes from Matthew are correct (even without your Hebrew), you selectively cut off what Jesus said next. From King James:

Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

So, as Christian ministers explain this, Jesus dodged the trick question and still managed to ke only) passages from Leviticus. Christians do follow the 10 commandments from Exodus and the book they call Deuteronomy.

Rabbi Hillel is obviously from a different faith and he's talking about "do unto others" not "love your neighbor", so your comparison to Jesus is off.

Furthermore, it's still baffling why you insist all Christians should follow Leviticus. What's it to you? It's so weird when people from one faith try to tell others how to practice their faiths. Especially when you're obsessively supporting the homophobe position that Leviticus is valid for Christians.

I don’t see how your emphasized passage about the law and the prophets abrogate Leviticus.

In any case, I don’t see how Jesus was radicalized. God said “thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.” He then says “these words which I give you today shall be upon thy hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk of them when you sit at home and walk upon the road. When you lie down and when you rise up. Tie them as symbols on your hands and upon your foreheads. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and upon your gates.” As this is the most important prayer in Judaism, the Jews have been doing exactly these things for thousands of years and do so today. Mezuzim are cylinders which contain this prayer and Jews nail them to their gates and their doorposts. There are special boxes called tefillin which contain this prayer. Jews place one one their forehead and the other on their left arm by their heart every morning. That’s how important this prayer has always been, since four hundred years before Jesus until today. For Jesus to say that this is the most important prayer was not radical at all. He was agreeing with both the Pharisees and the Sadducees. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%206&version=NIV

[Anonymous]

And you say Rabbi Hillel was of a different faith. No, he wasn’t. He was a Jew, like Jesus. Remember it was you who said to me “you do know Jesus was a Jew, right?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And you say Rabbi Hillel was of a different faith. No, he wasn’t. He was a Jew, like Jesus. Remember it was you who said to me “you do know Jesus was a Jew, right?”

Rabbi Hillel was not a Christian and obviously would have had differences with Christian theology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your son must live a chaste life; this is a burden but his suffering is a special offering.

This is exactly what I’m talking about. Unfortunately, Leviticus 18:22 is alive and well and, unfortunately, many Christians want to close their eyes to this sad fact.

You don't even need to go to Levitical law to justify this. God's law is self evident at creation when he made Adam and Eve.

A lot of people who have acquired disordered passions have to (or should, rather) deny themselves. It's not some horrific suffering unique to homosexuality, sorry folks. Love your kid, but you have to be on God's side.

Yuck. You are an awful person.

Life is short. Love is love.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your son must live a chaste life; this is a burden but his suffering is a special offering.

So you think her son should live a life without love and happiness..this is awful. It is no wonder that teen suicide rates among LGBTQ youth are so high - people like you contribute massively to this, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Love and happiness will never come from homosexual congress.

Are you a troll?

Are you a Catholic?

In the words of Josemaria Escriva, get used to saying no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you say Rabbi Hillel was of a different faith. No, he wasn’t. He was a Jew, like Jesus. Remember it was you who said to me “you do know Jesus was a Jew, right?”

Rabbi Hillel was not a Christian and obviously would have had differences with Christian theology.

As you yourself said to me: “You know Jesus was a Jew, right?” Jesus and Hillel were both Jews. They were not of different faiths.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your son must live a chaste life; this is a burden but his suffering is a special offering.

This is exactly what I’m talking about. Unfortunately, Leviticus 18:22 is alive and well and, unfortunately, many Christians want to close their eyes to this sad fact.

You don't even need to go to Levitical law to justify this. God's law is self evident at creation when he made Adam and Eve.

A lot of people who have acquired disordered passions have to (or should, rather) deny themselves. It's not some horrific suffering unique to homosexuality, sorry folks. Love your kid, but you have to be on God's side.

Yuck. You are an awful person.

Life is short. Love is love.

+1 ugh, the only people who should be suffering are people like this who contribute to so much hatred in the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your son must live a chaste life; this is a burden but his suffering is a special offering.

This is exactly what I’m talking about. Unfortunately, Leviticus 18:22 is alive and well and, unfortunately, many Christians want to close their eyes to this sad fact.

You don't even need to go to Levitical law to justify this. God's law is self evident at creation when he made Adam and Eve.

A lot of people who have acquired disordered passions have to (or should, rather) deny themselves. It's not some horrific suffering unique to homosexuality, sorry folks. Love your kid, but you have to be on God's side.

Yuck. You are an awful person.

Life is short. Love is love.

+1 ugh, the only people who should be suffering are people like this who contribute to so much hatred in the world.

The only people sho should be suffering.


Are you a Christian? Why did Christ go on the cross?