Because of bum babies. Serious guys! All that anal sex has got to create a bum baby ONE day!
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Maybe but for humans 1000 years is still many generations away from the actual guilty jews. So that´s a BIG miss for God..
"Father, forgive them, because they don´t know what they are doing. But only to those that have accepted me. Screw the rest. Wait, better yet, just screw his children."..
I always forget that last part! My bad! :sorry1:..
He abolished the old law in MANY things written. After he goes against more than one old law I have no reason to believe that the rest are good. I only keep those he said were good. Like "you are gods".
If you think Jesus didn´t put on a NEW LAW then you might be reading the wrong bible, or hjust taking into consideration veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery outdated material. Considering it was outsdated 2000 years ago.
did someone call my name?Because of bum babies. Serious guys! All that anal sex has got to create a bum baby ONE day!
When Pilate saw that he could not prevail at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed his hands and said, “I am innocent of the blood of this Just person. You see to it.” And all the people answered and said,“His blood be upon us and on our children.” (Matthew 27:24–25)!
is that sarcasm i smell? boy i will slap that smirk right off yo face son....... but all jokes aside, there was actually a quick walkin fast talkin announcer guy there who read all terms and conditions right after jesus recited his line.. people just didnt pay attention...... but seriously, all jokes aside now. when jesus said "forgive them" he was referring to all of humanity, because he took the sin of the world on his shoulders..... now, he gave us free will though, and so..... aahh, **** it, i really dont have a clue how to answer this one.... so you win on this point... just dont let it get to your head
dang it. i think you got me again... ****!!!
so MM you must be a Jesuist then?
ie: no Paul, no OT
is that a fair guess?
But that was the bllieve of them time for jews. That the son pays for the sins of the father. Jesus never said that, just "the people". QWell, "the people" have been wrong througout history
If you are serious, I am actually humbled o.o
I almost never hear anyone seriously say that when they feel it, so kudos to you
god still had a covenant with the jews. when god sent his son jesus down with the new covenant, the jews rejected it, and killed his son. so god gave the jews just what they asked for under the old covenant.
Aww so you weren´t serious?
Well, I said what I meant.
If that was it, then Jesus forgiveness was ineffective, and the "decision" of wanting the old covenant would still be of the fathers, not those with problems near WWII.
I don´t agree, but have it as you may
serious about what?
jesus' sacrifice was very effective.
hats why we have the new covenant today for anyone who so chooses to accept it.....
hats why we have the new covenant today for anyone who so chooses to accept it..... god is not forcing anyone....
those jews exercised their free will and chose to reject it, and kill jesus, so god gave them what they asked for..... and to this day, the jews still live under the old covenant.... they did so during WW2 as well, didnt they? had they repented and accepted jesus into their hearts as their personal lord and savior the outcome may have been different.
how soThe new one wasn´t an option, the same way the first one wasn´t an option.
according to you he forced the jews in the camps to be well... torturered and killed because something they parents did....
For starters, germans were killing jews as a race, not a religion. There could be christian jews in the camps. They don´t really cared about the religion. Their problem was mostly racial...
Well, this is out of discussion anyways.
In any case, Jesus never said homosexuals are evil
(nor that you need to worship him to get salvation: http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...r/119446-where-did-jesus-asked-worshpped.html )
no. jesus never said homos are evil. christianity opposes the disease of homosexuality, as you would oppose the disease of cancer, but jesus loves man.
Jesus never opposed homosexuality neither.
Wheter it is or not a "disease" has nothing to do with what Jesus said.
did someone call my name?
no. jesus never said homos are evil. christianity opposes the disease of homosexuality, as you would oppose the disease of cancer, but jesus loves man.
I think you do not wish to say it, but your reasoning pushes you into implying it involuntarily.If you follow your logic to the end you will not like the outcome. This is what happens when you are not strict with your beliefs. You might be fine on the surface but beneath the surface you will find to be at odds with yourself.
The question I have is this:
On reading the Bible it is fairly clear that the religion is anti-homosexual.
In that case , why would a homosexual choose to become or remain a Christian?
Some have suggested that an interpretation allows for homosexuality, if so - what makes you think this?
Now, I am no homophobe but if a religious book told me that I could not have blue eyes then I would try to find another God.
yes, no?
I think he's saying that Christian homosexuals who try not to do homosexual acts will be saved but those who believe their homosexual acts to be acceptable wont as they haven't changed their will to that of God's i.e. they aren't trying to follow God's will and desires but their own