₦airaland Forum

kingzizzy:
But in this case, there is no evidence that it was IPOB that attacked the priest, even the priest said he does not know who attacked him.

so you need to see their ipob ID card?

Which people enforce biafra day? Arewa?

Harrymig1:
1 Corinthians 7:1-15

Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

Amen

MuttleyLaff:
Nwanne you brought me over here by your spamming chronic appeal plastered all over the Religion forum, urging all and sundry, to come visit this thread.

Hmm, defective and elementary you typed? Those that leave in glass houses, shouldnt be throwing stones. Nwanne, Christianity, never started in any upper room on any day of Pentencost. Christianity, as in, Constantine Christianity, in cahoot with the "church" started in Rome.

"I was circumcised when I was eight days old.
I am a pure-blooded citizen of Israel and a member of the tribe of Benjamin
—a real Hebrew if there ever was one! I was a member of the Pharisees, who demand the strictest obedience to the Jewish law."
- Philippians 3:5

"Then Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked straight at Elymas and said,"
- Acts 13:9

Also Paul, was not as you put it, formerly Saul, this is because Saul and Paul were both already existing names is was known by. As a matter of fact, Saul was his Hebrew name, whilst Paul was his Roman name.

Paul had dual citizenship, he was both Roman and Jewish. He after the Acts 13:9 experience, stuck to using his Roman Paul name, for obvious reasons of the the work ahead and terrain he will be working

I am currently at page 6 since steadily reading from the beginning, but needed to interrupt my reading, in order to quickly interject immediately, as like above and at this point and right here, to say that, legendarymega is right, in what and where, he typed that the catholic started Christianity, this so, because the Roman Catholic Church was formed, after shady deal(s) and/or sell-out to the State by the "Church", as it was the Roman Emperors Constantine's and Licinius' Edict of Milan in AD 313 which established a policy of religious freedom for all, as in, this was a proclamation that permanently legalised Christianity in the Roman Empire, and so paved the way for Christianity to be the official religion of the entire Roman Empire too.

The introduction of pagan religions and assimilation of paganism influences was a tragic compromise by the early believers, as this resulted in the Romanization and paganization of the early believers' faith and the "Christianization" of pagan beliefs as we not just know but celebrate then and celebrate even up until now.

Anyway, the Roman Empire, adopted the Roman Catholic Church (i.e. RCC) as "official" church during Roman Emperor Constantine's reign, and it's worth noting, that, the supremacy of the Roman bishop (i.e. the papacy or pope) was set up, put into place, aided and abetted through the support of the Roman Emperors (i.e. notably Constantine and his successors)

Recall that I earlier mentioned the Edict of Milan in AD 313, which was a letter signed by the Roman Emperors Constantine and Licinius, that proclaimed religious toleration in the Roman Empire, well, in AD 325, Constantine called the First Council of Nicaea in AD 325, in an attempt to unify Christianity when doctrinal disputes arose, like for example Arianism, all about doctrines named after Arius, a teacher in the early 4th century A.D and so Constantine presided over this first ecumenical church council

So quick recap, by the 1st century AD, ekklēsia birthed on the teachings of Jesus Christ and later founded on the day of Pentecost in the upper room with a bunch of 120 believers.

By the 2nd century AD - believers already denouncing teachings, seen as heresies, such as Gnosticism, Montanism etcetera.

In the 4th century AD - ekklēsia was transformed, emerged Christians, an evolved "church", finally gets legalized and then promoted by Emperors Constantine and Theodosius I, as the state church, of the Roman Empire and so yes also that, legendarymega is right, that the Catholics, are the original owner of your bible, because truly, the RCC are the original owner of your bible version(s), because incidentally and truly, those versions were made off the back of "The Vulgate", which was an accepted Latin translation of the original Old and New Testament texts.

Some even called, "The Vulgate", the "The Vulgar" bible. Anyway, Jerome, of RCC, was the person, who translated the original Old and New Testament texts and compiled them into a single volume of the 66 books we enjoy today

his understanding of Christianity is as defective as your understanding of church history.

MiddleDimension:
polygamy, just like monogamy, is not to help solve your inability to hold yourself. don't give the great instituion a bad name.

lets hear what pastors here have to say about it.

@joagbaje @donnie @ubenedictus. i think ubenedictus will be against it since his church started all these

lol.

I am against polygamy....

A man shall leave his father and be joined to his wife and they shall be one flesh.

That is how Christian marriage is understood.
1 man + 1 wife = 1 flesh.

My church didn't just start monogamy, like all Catholic dogma, we simply inherited it from the our early forebears who were taught by the apostles or we applied Apostolic principles to current issues.

Nodogragra4me:
1 Peter 4

"Yet if any man suffer as a CHRISTIAN, let him not be ashamed; [16] but let him glorify God on this BEHALF." (AV, 1 Peter 4:16)


"For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it FIRST BEGIN AT US, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?" (AV, 1 Peter 4:17)


I just hope this need no further clarification with the capitalized.. …… begin at us being called this name , christian ….. Not just at the house but at us called this name Christian...used to distinguished them from other sects within the house of God like Pharisees and Sadducees. .....The , AND .... Gives the idea of different sect within the house of God... Every synagogue has those two prominent sect back then, Pharisees and Sadducees. General judgement for the house of God's house but special and more severe one for those called or identified as Christian ....doing things like Jesus Christ.....Following his ways and means and generating the waves as he did


Note that this Peter message makes it clear that everyone is a believer who believes in God. But all all who believe in God not is a Christian . The synagogue is a place for believers . ..everyone ...that is why it was the custom of Paul to always go there to debate the scripture with them .

Christian on the other hand , are believers who are following Christ methodology or teachings and examples in approaching God. Any deviation and you are a believer and not a Christian ... Muslims are believers but not Christians , Catholics are believers but not Christians , Hindus are believers but not Christians


There is an easy to read version of the Bible ...get it ... That is what you need


I will continue with the other parts of your work if they have biblical input but if it is about history please forget it ... My reason is well documented in this same thread. ... Hope you have read beyond page 6, by now

Ubenedictus and 9inches come and carry this your disciple.

And you think you are making sense?

If Catholics aren't Christian then there are no Christian in the world, there were never Christians in the world, there will never be Christians in the world.


In case you don't know, Protestantism began just 500 years ago, for the first 1500 years after Jesus' resurrection there were no protestants, all that existed for the first 1000 years were forms of Catholicism. So suddenly you think Christianity began 500 years ago with protestants abi?



Or it was only in the first century and then it jumped and began again in the 15th century?

Warship:
My brother just as you said everybody know that Igbos treat men of God in high esteem was one of the reasons I knew the guy was a DSS operative.

a Catholic priest is a DSS operative? Are you OK?

kingzizzy:
The priest did not say that IPOB attacked him, what he said is that doesn't know who attacked him but that the people asked him why he wasn't observing the sit at home order

This could have easily been hoodlums who took at advantage of the sit at home to try and perpetrate evil

But let us assume that it was IPOB that attacked the priest, is that anywhere near other groups such as OPC and Herdsmen who are armed and have have killed many people? What can be worse than being armed and killing people? A terrorist group will not wait for a sit at home protest to attack people

The incidents of violence concerning IPOB are very few in number every year but the NURTW attacks people every day in the same manner the priest was attacked

Violence of any form is not good but a few unverified incidents of violence is not enough to make IPOB a terrorist organisation especially when those that are doing far much worse like the herdsmen have not been declared terrorists

so you are using one senseless violence to justify another?

Because bokoharam kill people we should allow ipob beat a priest until he loses consciousness?

odigbosky:
Park whenever start. Although Obaseki is been futuristic in many of his projects, he should not forget to engage the youths in ventures that would keep them productive for the mean time.
He isn't doing much in Education, the school his predecessor closed down at Ekiadolor has totally destroyed the economic viability of that town till date. Till date funds gotten from the University at Iyamoh built with State government resources is still going into the account of one man who calls himself the comrade. Obaseki should do the needful

Edo wants more
Edo wants the best


Oba GHA to kpere

Ise!!!

iyamoh university is a public private partnership, of course the private part of the school should also received it's share of the profits.

onlyinJESUS:
Of course, Baptists aren't really reformed.
They don't understand the covenants

but are they not of the same Calvinist tradition?

What would you say is their misunderstanding about the covenant?

ngeneukwuewuGOAT:
good one obaseki. Oshiomole wanted a percentage of the state money to be given him but with GGO's refusal, he started using second term ticket to intimidate him. Oshuomole must be informed that Edo is not Lagos

this issue has nothing to do with oshiomole, it's his fellow Benin apc guys who are after him for not keeping and maintaining party structures

ArticleBeast:
I have written to the Bishop and gotten an invitation to a hearing. Fortunately, there are other people who have experienced it and we are going together for the hearing. The Diocese is in Army Depot Zaria, Kaduna state. I will attend the hearing by sunday 4pm. I just hope they don't try to push it under the rug.

how did it go?

Binikingdowm:
oga stop ranting Edo state isn't in the north or north central, we are in the south.

Muslims including outsiders residing here make less than 20% of the population so how are they going to influence any Election?

you are talking of Benin I believe. Etsako has a huge Muslim population, down to the boundary with kogi.

Their population is more than 20% in total

So who was given the keys in that passage?

How does this prove he didn't rape her?

Ladies can chat naughty and even start things up when they reach your house...
But when they say no! Please stop even if both of you have pull off your clothes.... Anything after no is rape.


All the chat does not prove anything. If at that moment in Paris she said no and then he violently continued... Then it is rape.

SOUTH BEND - By the time he died at the age of 50, Greek Catholic Bishop Vasile Aftenie was crippled, maimed and, according to accounts of those who knew him, out of his mind due to torture endured while imprisoned by Romania’s communist regime.

When he finally succumbed in 1950, Aftenie was too tall to fit into a makeshift coffin provided by the prison where he was being held, so his legs were cut off and thrown on top of his corpse before burial - a final gesture of disdain from a regime whose hostility to religion, and to Catholicism in particular, had already become the stuff of legend.

On Tuesday, ahead of a late May/early June trip by Pope Francis to Romania, Aftenie and six of his fellow bishops who died under the Romanian communists have been officially recognized as “martyrs” by the pontiff.

Born in the Lodroman village in Alba County in June 1899, Aftenie was a member of the Greek Catholic Church, the largest of the 23 Eastern churches in full communion with the pope. After his ordination to the priesthood in 1926, he was named auxiliary bishop of Bucharest in 1940, seven years before the country was officially declared the “Soviet Republic of Romania.”

Before long, Aftenie was arrested and imprisoned by the communist government for refusing to convert to Orthodoxy, which, at the time, had formed close ties to those in leadership of the Romanian communist party.

After chastising fellow Greek Catholic bishops for joining the Orthodox church under pressure, in 1949 Aftenie was sent to Romania’s Căldăruşani Monastery, which had been converted into a prison. A few months later he was put into isolation, tortured, and eventually died.

Aftenie is just one of thousands of Catholic faithful and clergy who faced a similar fate in the Socialist Republic of Romania, which existed from 1947-1989 and was led by the Romanian Communist Party.

Francis also recognized the martyrdom of bishops Ioan Suciu, Tito Livio Chinezu, Ioan Bălan, Alessandru Rusu, Iuliu Hossu and Valerio Traiano Frenţiu, all of whom, like Aftenie, were killed “in hatred of the faith” between 1950-1970 without a trial or proper burial.

Soviet Romania is widely considered to have been among the most brutal countries in terms of the persecution of Christians during the Communist Party’s anti-religion campaign.

According to some accounts, around 80,000 people were arrested in Romania between 1945-1952, 30,000 of whom were imprisoned. Of these, around 5,000 are believed to have been Orthodox priests, while some 400 priests from Eastern Catholic rites are believed to have been killed by the state.

After the Soviet Union occupied Romania in the aftermath of the Second World War, authorities took a hostile approach to religion, portraying it largely as an ideology of society’s elite upper crust and imprisoning anyone who spoke out against the regime or refused to cooperate with rules they put into place for churches.

Despite the suffering of many Orthodox, the Communist government and authorities from the Orthodox church found allies in one another - a relationship the Orthodox used in order to gain wiggle room, and one the government used as a means of exercising greater control over the population. When Communism in Romania fell in 1989, the Romanian Orthodox Church apologized for those who did not have the “courage” to be martyrs and who instead aligned with the regime.

https://cruxnow.com/church-in-europe/2019/03/21/ahead-of-romania-trip-pope-recognizes-seven-martyrs-under-communism/

ArticleBeast:
I have written to the Bishop and gotten an invitation to a hearing. Fortunately, there are other people who have experienced it and we are going together for the hearing. The Diocese is in Army Depot Zaria, Kaduna state. I will attend the hearing by sunday 4pm. I just hope they don't try to push it under the rug.

actually I just said a prayer of thanksgiving to God for giving you the courage to do that.

Please attend the hearing and tell me how it goes. Please take the phone with the proof with you.

If you think that it seems they are trying to sweep the issue away, threaten that you are ready to take the matter to the congregation for doctrine and faith in Rome and that you'll copy the papal nuncio in the letter. That should make them take notice.

But hopefully it won't come to that, they'll do the hearing and inform you guys on the next step.... He will certainly get a canonical penalty even though it won't be a public affair.

It is a good thing you guys took it up... I'm proud of you guys.

That's the diocese of Zaria.

Bishop's House,
Hospital Road, Wusasa,
P.O. Box 90,
Zaria, Kaduna State,
Nigeria

ArticleBeast:
I should speak fact. I am a Catholic member o but I hate this idea of we catholics acting like the rot isnt only in pentecostal. Just google catholic priests and sex and you will see the evil deeds done my many of them. Right now, one of the father in my diocese is sending my gf dick pics. I am looking at it now with the useless messages he has been sending. This na human being I dey do confession under o. Bro they are many and I will tell you its worse under the catholic church when it comes to randy men of God. It may be hard for them to launder money or use money anyhow but for randy doinz they are ahead

write to your Bishop with proof. These are the kind of things Catholics like yourself should make sure never ever happens.

Report him, if you don't get a response in two months report him and his Bishop to the papal nuncio.
If you don't know the address, just tell me the diocese and I'll give you the address.

Some bad eggs will give everyone a bad name, if he isn't stopped he will cause a calamity.

Abeg for the sake of others, Report him.

Jakumo:
Wow, this is a clear instance where the old saying of "Damned if you do, and damned if you don't" is appropriate.

Reach for the engine stop button of your car, and be blasted to kingdom come, or don't reach for it, and risk being lit up for failure to comply.

The long and short of this story is that one should NEVER commit the major crime of driving whilst black, in the good state of Arkansas.

Wait a minute. I just watched the entire video, and a black police officer is shown displaying an AR15 assault rifle that SEEMS to have been in the car of the arrested black man. If that was indeed the scenario, then the aggressive stance of the arresting officer is perfectly understandable.

While it may be perfectly legal to carry an assault rifle in your car whilst in the state of Arkansas, it is no surprise to see pulse rates speed up when it is spotted by the police.

all the more reason why he was right not to move. If he had moved they would have used the riffle as proof that he was armed.

CyynthiaKiss:
IPOB attacked him ?, so Ipob went to Parish house and dragged him out and beat him ? because every Catholic knows priest lives inside the father's house which is also inside the church compound... Say something meaningful and believable nah.. Haba!

This is the same way lai Mohamed paid some miscreants to pose with Biafran flag in the Bush while threatening to do what is unprintable.


Last thing Ipob wll do is to join issue with Catholic Church because they know their maker. Its not a coincidence that 7 out of 10 Igbos your see on the street are Catholics. There is a reason for that.

Meanwhile, Ignore the first clown that commented, depression has hit which is reflecting on his comment..
Keeping Ipob in the same sentence with Isis like Ipobs belong to religion piss.. Clown.

priest live in parish house but they also go for mass at outstation.

Seems he was going to an outstation attached to his parish.

In fact the Catholic Church where I worshipped this morning is an outstation of another church, the priest had the drive some kilometers to get there

budaatum:
How can they not see? Is it not that "refined Christianity" that they practice now? Or do they seriously believe they are practising "traditional Christianity"?

They see! They just refuse to admit it!

that sometimes gets me.
Of course the Catholic Church has got a lot of things wrong down history, in fact I always wonder how much we are getting wrong now. But it is always easy to scream satanic about things one isn't informed about.

That is how I see the issue of the slavery and torture.

Medieval courts considered torture OK just as it considered slavery, the church went about unconsciously and sometimes consciously refining culture.
In the issue of torture it was a ban on certain types in church court, a ban against the clergy from administering it, making sure a doctor is present to prevent injury and the shedding of blood, and only when guilt has been firmly established... Until today the church now says torture is intrinsically evil.... That is faith refining culture.

For slavery where the church allowed indentured servitude and said the slaves had certain rights, it was against chattel slavery for Catholics....

Gradually men of Faith, many non Catholics will totally abolish slavery.

We can blame the church for ever allowing indentured servitude or we can look through out history and see that humans have been enslaving each other and recognize that at certain points it was the faith that was condemning the worst impulses of human nature.


The humanism we practice today arose from Christian Europe....

Nodogragra4me:
we have never discussed whether angels prays with us or not, the discussion has been whether angels makes intercession or prays for us as your church practices and I was emphatic that angels are ministering spirits ; they do not pray, they ministers Gods instructions. If angels prays God won't have proclaimed that he looked for a man that would stand in the gap, he would have used angels.

This is what I said, I clearly said it shows they pray with us. Seems like you are a liar.



As for angels, In the Scripture we find prayers addressed to the angels asking them to pray with us, as in the opening verses of Psalms 148: "Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord from the heavens, praise him in the heights! Praise him, all his angels, praise him, all his host!"

It is like you are condemned to providing the proof of my own statement and not yours... Psalms Psalm 103:20 is exactly what I have been declaring that angles do work not prayers... They excel in strength because they work the instructions of heavens

another dumb submission. The psalmist invites the angels to join him in praising God, exactly as I said that the angels pray with us.

As for Bible origin, you or 9inches stated that your church wrote and gave us the Bible and I pointed out that the scripture itself doesn't support that claim that Daniel was reading the book of Jeremiah in captivity. I declared that Jesus expounded all that was written concerning him by all the prophets from the scripture, before the catholic church, Jesus was already declaring that, it is written, the apostles followed the same tradition of is it not written. I started that the new testament is the diary, letters of the apostles that when your church says a latter according to Paul, it means just that, Pauls letter and not your church letter on his behalf

all you need to do is quote exactly what was said. Not what you imagined

koyyes:
My question was under the assumption that there was a court marriage.

I don't see any where indicating that the two weren't married at all besides not being married in church.

Catholics recognize court marriage for other people like Muslim's and non Catholics. It is not recognized for a Catholic. A Catholic can't do just court marriage or Islamic marriage or traditional marriage and present that as valid in the church.

Matrimony is a sacrament for Catholics, it can only be received in the Church.

Nodogragra4me:
Thank you my brother.


There is nothing the two of them particularly the Unenedictus guy has not thrown into defending the indefensible. He twist the scripture, ascribe what is not in a verse or chapter to it and then tried to usher ms into a so called history and tradition of the early church.
I got angry when he yanked off psalms 148 and claimed it indicates that the angels are praying with us for...


He claims the catholic church wrote and gave us the Bible and I pointed out from the Bible how that claim was nullified by the same Bible. He moved to the new testament and we have bee on this when every other person has since moved on from that thread.

here comes a group of people gossiping.

Please go back and read that psalm, it is a invitation for all of creation to join in the praise of God, and among the intelligent creatures mentioned there are the angels. And I used it as a text to show that the angels pray WITH us, which that passage shows and yes, the psalmist invites them to join in that prayer of praise.

That is not the only place angels are invited to join a believer on earth in a prayer.

Psalm 103:20
Bless the LORD, all His angels mighty in strength, who do His word, who hearken to the voice of his command.

Psalm 103:21
Bless the LORD, all His hosts, you servants who do His will.


If I remember correctly it was in your discussion with 9inces that the issue of the Bible came up and you immediately ran away from discussing the historical context from which the church canonised the Bible. Now you are here making false claims.

The fact that you protestants interprets scriptures in a way alien to the first 1000years of Christianity only means your interpretation is heretic, it doesn't mean I am wrong.

9inches:
So you're still arguing if saints on earth retain their sainthood in heaven... Scriptural relativism is your problem, my friend. You clearly have no one to teach you the Word of God correctly. You're here trying to bismirch the church of the Apostles - the body of Christ. Good luck with that.

it's just too funny, he is like someone who was given brain cells for decoration, how can someone be arguing whether holy ones on earth are still holy ones in heaven. Do they lose their holiness when they enter heaven?

That is the effect of sola scriptura he wants every word to be written explicitly in the Bible as if that was the reason the Bible was written and complied.

Nodogragra4me:
I don't have the time for the table tennis argument. You win but remember that there is no where in the scripture supports your relationship with the saints you claim lives in heaven and prays or answers your prayers.

Jesus is the only way to the father... He said so himself... Saints live here and need prayers...they are not some prayer warriors in heaven... Angels don't pray, they are messengers, ministering spirits sent out of heaven to meet needs not to pray

Since you seem to have a problem agreeing that those in heaven can also be called "Holy ones", maybe I will help you.


1st as I earlier agreed the scriptures uses the term saints with reference to Christians here on earth, in fact 99% of when the word "saint" is used in the Bible it refers to living believers here on earth.
2nd there is a entry in col 1:12


Colossians 1:12 New King James Version (NKJV)
12 giving thanks to the Father who has qualified us to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in the light.

That is an entry that we Christians or specifically the apostle and the Church addressed are sharing the inheritance of the Saints in Light.

That is an entry for the holy ones in heaven...

Hope that helps your funny doctrine of everything thing must be explicitly stated in the Bible.


Are you OK now

koyyes:
So if you don't marry in a catholic church, you won't receive 'holy communion'?

So you just dey hear am?

Sex outside marriage is a sin for Catholics. No marriage =cohabitation =state of sin=no communion

OLAADEGBU:
Martin Luther was one of those who started the reformation when he nailed the 95 thesis on the doors of the Vatican church when he started going back to the holy Scriptures. Many of you are still fighting against this reformation 'till this day!'

the Catholic Church has been reforming the culture of people from time immemorial, that has nothing to do with Martin Luther, even Martin Luther Germany also used torture, only the Catholic Church curbed it.

What Martin Luther did was cause schism in the body of Christ, the result is demoninationalism which has now gradually increased atheism and agnostics in Europe. Martin Luther was in support of murdering jews and his writing are the backbone behind the holocaust.

Shepherd00:
Your last paragraph spoiled the whole argument you tried to raise. For you to say 'The Protestants also..., means the Catholic Church did these things but we shouldn't only talked abt the Catholics.

Wow. Blame shifting.

then you didn't read the argument at all.

The entire World in the medieval era used torture, both Christian and Muslim, Catholics and protestants. It was only the Catholic Church that limited it, prohibited clergy from using it, made sure a doctor is present and no maiming, permanent injury or blood shedding. It was the Catholic Church that limited it and finally campaigned for it's total removal, even today the church is still the leading voice against torture.

ola said Catholics used torture without context and you simply came to proclaim Catholics are satanic.... You didnt say all who practice torture are satanic, instead you went for those who limited and stopped torture and called them satanic, that's hypocrisy.

I didn't shift any blame, I simply noted that you guys are using double standards.

If Catholics are satanic for limiting and finally putting to an end torture which was considered legal in the medieval era, then the protestants are no better.

OLAADEGBU:
The more reason why all traditional religions should follow the teachings of Jesus Christ and not the doctrines of man.

so you think courts follow Christianity?

In another way, I think you fail to see how the Christian faith refines culture and practices.

In an age when torture was considered normal, it was the church that restricted it, prevented the shedding of blood and maiming, until everyone started to take notice. It was the same church people who advocated for the total end of torture and continue to do so today.

That's how faith reforms practices. But unfortunately you are the type who only see on part and start condemning.

It Sunday so let me touch this a little.

MuttleyLaff:
I have so far been following in the quiet background, your interaction with keen interest and fully enjoying reading your comments on this matter with a gladdened heart

Why are you saying nobody is endorsing gay sex Ubenedictus? Especially when God never, at any instance, is against gay sex huh?.

The Bible never has said, it is a sin to have sexual feelings with anyone of the same sex. God too, has no problems with same sex couples, as in, consenting adults loving each other. God never said homosexuality was an abomination either Ubenedictus and trust me, jesusjnr knows this and more.

Nowhere in the original manuscript of the bible Ubenedictus, is homosexuality, even in the remotest, being mentioned as wrong or a sin. That nonsense and its accomplice other bunch of lies werent put into the bible, until the King James version was written.

Ubenedictus, I repeat the bible does not say same-sex love is sin, but it does say that lust, lasciviousness, being promiscuous, being unfaithful, infidelity, cheating, straying, fornication etcetera are sins.

Being gay is not a sin, gluttony, shaving your beard, eating seafood like lobster, shrimp, crab, catfish or pork etcetera is sin. God encourages people to love everyone even your worst enemies. By loving someone, you're doing what God asks us to do. When homophobes and/or homophobics, the likes of jesusjnr, elated177, Shepherd00, Agrogbeide, Alexandro15, TV01, ThothHermes condemn others for being gay, they're condeming love with hate, and this goes directly against, all that God and the teachings of Jesus says.

Ubenedictus reflect and ponder further more on the subject matter long enough please. Think about it, being gay, as in, same sex couples in a kind, caring, loving, committed, trusting and faithful relationship, is the only alleged and so-called "sin thing" that doesn't harm nor hurt anyone, doesnt have a victim, doesnt abuse a partner, doesnt cheat on partner, not into infidelity etcetera

Ubenedictus, if being gay, as in, same sex couples, in a kind caring, loving, committed, trusting and faithful relationship is not an affliction, then what is with you having qualms endorsing gay sex, hmm? If you know Ubenedictus, what it feels like to lie, cheat, steal, hurt, hate, lust, be jealous, practice idolatry etcetera and you've felt the negative consequences, please list what are the negative consequences and obvious negatives brought into the world by gays that compels that they be looked at as bad and threatening please?

Isnt it ironic Ubenedictus that being gay, condemned and purported as sin, shares the same passage with forbidding wearing clothing of mixed fabrics, cutting and trimming the hair on the sides of one's head etcetera but they arent the squeaky wheels, like being gay, getting the oil attention, huh?

We can, maybe later Ubenedictus, have you elaborate more on what you in toto mean by sodomy in your "... I am against sodomy" comment
cc Baddiezz, TV01, ThothHermes, VBCampaign, Michellekabod2

The first time the bible hints at same sex sexual relations it was in the Torah.

In Genesis the wicked people of Sodom will attempt to rape angels in human form. The epistle of Jude says that among other things the city practiced sexual immorality he called "unnatural desires". It was destroyed.

Then lev says.

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. (Leviticus 18:22)
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. (Leviticus 20:13

I know you are pretty ready to dismiss this as part of the law, including the dietary restrictions etc.
But the issue appears again in new testament, rm1:26,27. it situate the homosexual desire as part of the distortion of human desires occasioned by our fall, and used the term "unnatural" to describe it. The term for man sex appears in the letter to the Corinthians and again it was condemn.

Each time it is talked about it is condemned, nor is it included in God's plan for human sexuality which is marriage. In fact Jesus would specify that marriage is between a man and a woman.

As for your submission that no one is hurt... Well that argument can be made for pornography and masturbation, bestiality,..., a sin doesn't need to physical hurt anyone, it simply has to be the wrong use of God's gift. In this case human sexuality.

MuttleyLaff:
Do you always like this play the denomination card, huh?

This is sending me on an "arodan" worthless excercise, so lets cut to the chase, and both agree, accept and start recognising that keeping a beady eye on the times same sex sexual relationship appear in scriptures and their context was not of any particular concern of the Bible. What you ask for, is non existent, it isnt on God's radar list. What God was anxious and more worried about, were issue, like the overarching demand for justice, economic equality and the fair treatment of all right across board, even to foreigners and strangers.

Now, Ubenedictus, please elaborate more on what you, in toto mean by sodomy in your "... I am against sodomy" comment and the sentence in the comment means and is talking all about. Thank you.

by sodomy in the context I used it, I mean homosexual sexual relations. I thought that was clear.

OLAADEGBU:
There is no where in the Scriptures where Jesus instructed His followers to torture who they perceived to be 'heretics,' be they catholics or protestants. If they torture people it is not done in the name of Jesus Christ.

you see how you have calmly and peacefully answered your own question?