₦airaland Forum

Luke 10:29-37 (emphasis added by
me)

…so he asked Jesus, “And who is my
neighbor?” 30 In reply Jesus said: “A GAY man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away,
leaving him half dead. 31 A CHRISTIAN priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a (BORN AGAIN BELIEVER) Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But an ATHEIST, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the GAY man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after
him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’ 36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
37 The expert in the law replied, “The
one who had mercy on him.” Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”


I think we have missed our opportunity
to love our neighbors. And I believe that
atheists namely have taken the place
where Christians should have been in
the first place.
May be some of us doesent hate gay.Sure. But do you love them as much as you love yourself? You say I do not hate them but you do not help them either. The same way you may help a fellow in your church who has a habit of lying.

Being Gay is sinful,YES.Well, newsflash! so is lying, cheating, cursing, arrogance, drinking, wrathful, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, envy, murder, deceit,
malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things,
disobedient to parents, being without natural affection,implacable, unmerciful.

I think some Christians have become too much holy to realize their error. When the gay community was bashed or persecuted they stood on the side rails and watched in silence. They could have helped but they didn’t because being Gay was unacceptable to them. They fulfill the part of the priest in the above parable.

And some of the Christians who really
felt like they should have helped but
didn’t are equally wrong because they
mistook grace as legalism in the dogmatic form. They are the Levis’ – the chosen people of God, the born again believers, who looked on the poor gay but then turned their heads and walked on.

And finally the atheist stood up and got
the gay person some help. Well, I
certainly applaud them on this.

Bottom line. Gays are there, if we do not help them, someone will but we would be directly opposing the spirit of love and grace if we didn’t. Regardless of whether you believe homosexuality is a sin or not, remember this, if it is a sin, it is no greater than any other sin, it is certainly not the UNPARDONABLE sin.

Matthew 26:36-40
36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment…?” 37 Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your (GAY) neighbor as yourself.’
40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”
Happy Sunday.

EzioAuditore:
Your knowledge and misperceptions of how the Quran is interpreted never ceases to amaze. But we're not talking about the Quran here, we're talking about the bible. I searched your website, no substantial refutation whatsoever in there. You have failed!

continue from were I stop, read here for more
http://ecclesia.org/truth/contradictions.html
Thread debunked
Now are you ready for my question?

11. Matthew 2:23 is a cause of trouble since the spoken prophecy that the Messiah would be called a Nazarene can nowhere be found written in the Old Testament. Answer: Again, this is a prophesy that was spoken, so it is not necessarily written (see above answer). However, you may also consider this: First, you must understand that a "Nazarene" is not a "Nazarite." There's the Nazerite vow (Numbers 6:13), Samson was a Nazarite (Judges 13:5,24), but a "Nazarene" simply means a citizen of Nazarite. There are passages in the Old Testament which say Jesus would be called a Nazarene, but it's a matter of what is meant by the term "Nazarene." A "Nazarene" came to be a synonym for one who is contemptible or despised (John 1:46). We see similar terms today dealing with racism and nationalism. But notice that the previous two prophesies in Matthew 2; verse 15 says "the prophet, saying..." (singular) then he quotes directly from the scripture; verse 17 says "Jeremiah the prophet, saying..." (singular) then he quotes directly from Jeremiah. But notice how verse 23 is worded, "which was spoken by the prophets,..." (plural) and there's no word "saying" indicating a direct quote, "He shall be called a Nazarene." Notice the difference? It's because Matthew is using a summation statement. He's using something that the people of his time would be familiar with which would state the same thing that the prophets stated in Isaiah 49:7; 53:3, Psalm 22:6, that he would be despised. 12. Then what about 1Corinthians 15:4: "Christ rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures"? Where is it written in the Old Testament that Christ would rise the third day? You may search the Old Testament for prophesies of Jesus' death, burial and resurrection on the third day, but you will never find them! Answer: Hosea 6:2 says, "After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight." This is antitypical language which refers to Messiah, the ideal Israel (Isaiah 49:3; compare Hosea 11:1, Matthew 2:15), who was raised on the third day (John 2:19; 1Corinthians 15:4; compare Isaiah 53:10). Compare the similar use of Israel's political resurrection as the type of the general resurrection of which "Christ is the first-fruits" (Isaiah 26:19; Ezekiel 37:1-14; Daniel 12:2). Additionally, 2 Peter 3:16 says that the "epistles" are scriptures also. So, the "scriptures" in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 could easily refer to the epistles from the new Testament books, many of which were written prior to the writing of 1 Corinthians. 13. Matthew 12:30 says those who are neutral are against Jesus, but Mark 9:40 says those who are neutral are for Jesus. Answer: These two verses address two different situations. In Matthew 12:30, when it comes to the critical point of accepting or rejecting Jesus, not being for Jesus amounts to opposing Him (John 3:18). In Mark 9:40, when it comes to someone attempting to work in Christ's name, but perhaps with less than a full knowledge of him (Acts 18:25), there is no need to believe he is against Christ. 14. The Scripture tells us to seek and understand God (Psalms 53:2, Proverbs 2:5, Daniel 9:13 ), but at the same time says that God cannot be understood (Job 11:7; 37:23, Romans 11:33). Answer: To quote from Job 11:7; 37:23 is misleading. It is like quoting from the Jews who said Jesus was a sinner, and then quote from Jesus who said he was not a sinner, and claim the Scripture contradicts itself. Job 11:7 is a quote from what Zophar said, and Job 37:23 is a quote from what Elihu said. These two people condemned righteous Job falsely. God condemned Zophar and Elihu for what they said! God himself said of these 2 people that they spoke wrong: Job 42:7, "...for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right." Therefore, these 2 verses are not the teachings of God, but of man. As for Romans 11:33, this verse is saying how unattainable it is to have the same wisdom and knowledge that God possesses, not how hard it is to understand God. The point is that man, in a limited, physical body, cannot know the same knowledge that an infinite, spiritual entity possesses. For example, someone can say they "know" someone, like their wife. And they do! They know their thoughts, what they will choose to do, how they react to situations, etc. They know them! But what that husband doesn't know is all the wisdom and knowledge that she herself possesses. Only she knows that. And with God, it is impossible for a pea-brained man to have the same amount of knowledge that an infinite God possesses.

1. How can the Bible say God made the world (Acts 17:24) and loves the world (John 3:16) on the one hand, and then turn around and tell us not to love the world (1 John 2:15) on the other? Is this a contradiction in the Bible? Answer: No, but it does need some explanation. The Bible uses the word "world" in three different ways. First, it can mean the material universe or earth which God created. This is how the word is used in Act 17:24. Second, it can mean the world of mankind, as in John 3:16. God loves all people. Third, it can mean the affairs and things of ungodly men. This is how the word is used in 1 John 2:15-16, and this is the primary meaning of the word "world" throughout the New Testament. 2. In the first day of creation, God divided the light from the dark (Genesis 1:4), but the sun was not created until the fourth day (Genesis 1:16)! How do you explain this? Answer: This does not imply that light and darkness are two distinct substances, seeing darkness is only the privation of light; but the words simply refer us by anticipation to the rotation of the earth round its own axis once in twenty-three hours, fifty-six minutes, and four seconds, which is the cause of the distinction between day and night, by bringing the different parts of the surface of the earth successively into and from under the solar rays; and it was probably at this moment that God gave this rotation to the earth, to produce this merciful provision of day and night. For the manner in which light is supposed to be produced, see Genesis 1:16, under the word sun. 3. Is God both good and evil? Isaiah 45:7. Answer: Notice it does not say that God is evil but that He creates evil. What this is saying is that God has allowed evil to co-exist in this sphere in order to test man as well as to perfect him. It is in the midst of such opposition, unpleasant though it often is, that man grows spiritually the most. Therefore, as God gave Satan permission to afflict Job, so He permits the same with us, unless our affliction is of our own making or the collective fault of unredeemed society. God creates evil, yes, but not the evil of sin, he creates the evil of punishment. He is the Author of all that is true, holy, and good, but evil, error, and misery came into the world by his permission, through the willful disobedience of man, but are restrained and overruled to his righteous purpose. Evil is the instrument which he employs in his government, and is permitted by him in order to execute his wise and just decrees. 4. The Gospel records Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane (John 17:1-26; Luke 22:39-46), but the writers were asleep when Jesus prayed. How do you explain this? Answer: Some believe it was revealed to the apostle John by revelation after the event. This is a possible explanation but unlikely. We know the disciples were asleep whilst Jesus prayed but what we don't know is how much of the prayer they heard, or didn't hear. Let us remember these facts: (1) Jesus was only a "stone's throw away" from the disciples; (2) The silence of the night was around them; and (3) it is more than likely that Jesus prayed aloud because people did everything aloud in those days. Therefore, the disciples heard the opening words of the prayer before they went to sleep. Sit down and read Jesus' Prayer aloud for yourself and time how long it takes you (John 17:1-26; Luke 22:39-46). I would estimate that this is a three minute prayer. I very much doubt that the disciples fell asleep instantly and that Jesus returned to them three minutes later. What is more probable is that this prayer was the introduction to a much longer prayer. The Comforter brought the part which they had heard back to remembrance after He had ascended, this being a promise made to them (John 14:26 ). Thus the part of the prayer we have recorded is that which the disciples could remember. It must be the part they heard whilst they were fully awake. No doubt providence intended that we hear no more, and no doubt the same providence had intended that they fall asleep too. 5. Jesus said, "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true" (John 5:31) and then claims, "I am one that bear witness of myself" (John 8:18) . Aren't these contradictory comments? Answer: Jesus did not claim Himself as a witness. Jesus said His own witness agreed with the witness of the Father (John 8:18) , satisfying the Law's requirement of two witnesses (John 8:17). 6. After Moses and Aaron turned all the waters that were in the Nile river into blood (Exodus 7:20), the magicians did the same (verse 22). But if all the water in Egypt was turned into blood by Moses, where did the magicians get the water which they changed into blood? Answer: This question is answered in Exodus 7:24. The Egyptians digged round about the river for water to drink, and it seems that the water obtained by this means was not bloody like that in the river. On this water therefore the magicians might operate. Again, though a general commission was given to Moses, not only to turn the waters of the river (Nile) into blood, but also those of their streams, rivers, ponds, and pools (Exodus 7:19); yet it seems pretty clear from Exodus 7:20 that he did not proceed thus far, at least in the first instance; for it is there stated that only the waters of the river were turned into blood. Afterwards the plague doubtless became general. At the commencement therefore of this plague, the magicians might obtain other water to imitate the miracle; and it would not be difficult for them, by juggling tricks or the assistance of a familiar spirit, to give it a bloody appearance, a fetid smell, and a bad taste. On either of these grounds there is no contradiction in the Mosaic account, though some have been very studious to find one. 7. If God is full of love, why did he destroy nations? Answer: He destroyed them out of love for the people. Just like the world interceded and destroyed Nazi Germany to protect the people of the world from violence, God did likewise. God destroyed the land in the time of Noah because of the violence it was filled with (Genesis 6:13). God destroyed Sodom and Gomorra because of the violence that it was filled with (Genesis 13:13), and the fact that there was not one righteous man living there (Genesis 18:16-25). He threatened to destroy Nineveh because of the violence in their land (Jonah 3:, but Nineveh changed their ways and was spared (verse 10). God destroyed Jerusalem because the city was full of violence (Ezekiel 7:23-25). God could not find one righteous man in Israel, so he had to destroy it to save the people from their misery (Ezekiel 22:29-31). If God would have found even one man that sought God's Truth, God would have pardoned it (Jeremiah 5:1). 8. For a chapter and a half, David has been Saul's personal musician, and in 1 Samuel 17:55-58, Saul wants to know who David is? The Scripture is not reliable! Answer: Saul never asked, "Who is this man", he didn't want to know who David was! He asked, three times, the same basic question. He wanted to know whose son he was (verses 55,56,58). He wanted to know who David's father was! 9. Did David buy it for fifty shekels of silver, or six hundred shekels of gold? 2 Samuel 24:24, 1 Chronicles 21:25. Answer: In Samuel, David purchased the threshing floor and the oxen, and there built an altar to the Lord. In Chronicles, David bought the whole place. Being much larger than the threshing, he paid more. Solomon's temple could not have been built on a threshing floor (2 Chronicles 3:1). The fifty shekels of silver was the earnest payment, and the six hundred shekels of gold the total price. 10. Why does Matthew attribute a quote about the potter's field to Jeremiah, when Jeremiah has no such passage, and the closest one in the Old Testament is Zechariah (Matthew 27:9-10; Zechariah 11:12)? Answer: Matthew 27:9 says this prophesy was "spoken by Jeremy (Jeremiah)." Some prophecies were spoken and not written. Some others were not spoken but only written, while some others were both spoken and written. When we read a quotation that says "as it is written", we will find it 100% in the Scripture, since it is guaranteed that it is written. However, when what is quoted is said that it was simply spoken, then we may find it written but we may also not find it written. The Word does not guarantee that it was written. What it guarantees is that it was spoken. This prophecy was only spoken by the prophets and it was latter written down by Matthew. There are sixteen quotations in the Scripture for which we are told that they were spoken. These are Matthew 1:22, 2:15, 17, 23, 3:13, 4:14, 8:17, 12:17, 13:35, 21:4, 22:31, 24:15, 27:9, 27:35, Mark 13:14, and Acts 2:16. To see whether they were both spoken and written, or whether they were only spoken, we have to search the Scripture to see if we can find them. A search like this shows that most of the prophecies that were spoken were also written, but not all of them (Matthew 2:23 and 27:10 for instance). To be continue...

EzioAuditore:
Lmao! Nothing in that website refutes or explains anything here! Is that the best you could come up with, a website? Lmao! I really have you Pillocks by the balls don't i?

bible contradiction is not a new topic here, the answer are there in the link. Quran is the only religious book that abrogate it teaching and the former revelation are still in the quran, how will you know the genuine revelation?

Answer to bible contradiction
http://www.comereason.org/bible-contradictions.asp
And to know the quran is not the word of God but satan, read here http://www.bibleprobe.com/corruptedquran.htm

MuttleyLaff:
What is the bolded above meant to mean
You air your thoughts, others independently do likewise.
Is that arguing?
Have better things to do than lollygagging or argue




After I had posted the above, I cant seem to understand why you're holding out a link about Jewish culture dominated by men to me.

Thought you were on about the women of Corinth, the reality of ancient Greek culture and hetaira, but you obviously aren't

ok, I want to read your explanation, did Paul really say woman are not to preach or say a word in the church?

MuttleyLaff:
With a clearer head I have just revisited the above post,
and would love to hear where were you going with the "culture" thing.
What culture are you talking about or referring to?
Curious to know if yours aligns with mine.

I don't want to argue that why I ignore most of your first post.
400 years ago women are to stay home,the Jewish culture was dominated by men ,Women could not play a significant role in the synagogue. Read this link and know more about women in ancient isreal http://www.bible-history.com/court-of-women/women.html Paul was aware of there culture.