The Purpose of Marriage

[inocente]

**inocente

No, you can’t fling false accusations around and then expect those you falsely accused to retrospectively answer your ridiculous trumped-up charges.**

As always, you dodge the questions because the answers you would truthfully give would show that your alliance is not with St. Paul.

Do you or do you not agree with St. Paul?

You cannot say, “I agree with St. Paul that sodomy is evil.” Can you?

Take a long pause and a deep breath before you answer.

By refusing to answer the question, you will have clearly answered it.

Still waiting to hear about a Baptist publication that defends same-sex marriage.

You repeatedly break a commandment to test Christ’s patience with you.

No, you can’t fling false accusations around and then expect those you falsely accused to retrospectively answer your ridiculous trumped-up charges.

Read what Paul says about slanderers (scandalmongers) in the very passage you yourself quoted. It’s against the ten commandments to give false testimony against your neighbor. But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander. - 1 Peter 3

 

[Charlemagne_II]

inocente
**
No, you can’t fling false accusations around and then expect those you falsely accused to retrospectively answer your ridiculous trumped-up charges.**

O.K. Your refusal to answer can only mean one thing. You have not been falsely accused.

 

[mek42]

Wasn’t Romans a letter to Roman believers? Does the scope of Romans include rreplacement of the law of the land, including nonbelievers?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

mek
**
Wasn’t Romans a letter to Roman believers? Does the scope of Romans include rreplacement of the law of the land, including nonbelievers? **

The scope of Romans includes a condemnation of same-sex relations. inocente refuses to say he agrees with Paul that same-sex relations are evil. I’ve asked incocente to proivide the nbame of a Baptist publication that endorses same-sex marriage. He refuses (or cannot do so).

The scope of this discussion concerns the purpose of marriage. It is certainly not to validate same-sex sodomy. Never before our time in the history of the world do we hear of anyone but lunatic Roman emperors even entertaining such an idea. Now we have a Supreme Court Justice officiating at such an absurd wedding. Draw your own conclusion.

 

[inocente]

Wasn’t Romans a letter to Roman believers? Does the scope of Romans include rreplacement of the law of the land, including nonbelievers?

Paul wrote letters to the churches to sort out disagreements and to teach them.

If you look at [the passage](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=rom 1:18-32&version=NI) it’s not clear who he’s talking about. They’re not in the church since he says they worship idols (they “worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator”). Perhaps a cult of animist ex-Christians since he says they “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles”. In any case he’s writing about very bad people, they “have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil.”

 

[inocente]

inocente
**
No, you can’t fling false accusations around and then expect those you falsely accused to retrospectively answer your ridiculous trumped-up charges.**

O.K. Your refusal to answer can only mean one thing. You have not been falsely accused.

Oh dear. Whereas the sensible thing to do would have been to back off and ask God’s forgiveness, you just keep breaking the commandment over and over.

And yet so far you’ve produced not one shred of evidence, just false witness, as if the world answers to you and not to God. So you must of course have the opportunity to place your evidence before God and the world.

Please cite your evidence for your claim that a Jewish US Supreme Court Justice is a mad demented neo-Nazi and that I’ve attacked St Paul and am defending the devil’s own work. Incidentally, if your evidence is not specifically what I have said, I’ll argue that you’re also defaming the many Catholics worldwide who support equal marriage.

You may like to start a thread to get a wider readership for your slanders. Either way it might be wise for you to have a word with the moderator before continuing, since in your anger you’ve not just broken one of the ten commandments but several stickies.

I’m out all day tomorrow and look forward to seeing your evidence. Or you could just calm down and retract your slanders, up to you.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

inocente

I’m out all day tomorrow and look forward to seeing your evidence. Or you could just calm down and retract your slanders, up to you.

It is not a slander to keep pointing out that you keep refusing to endorse St. Paul’s condemnation of same-sex relations. If you go through your last several posts, you will see that you keep refusing to do that. Why? Could it be that you actually disagree with Paul. Do you think Paul is slandering the Romans who love their sodomy?

Whereas the sensible thing to do would have been to back off and ask God’s forgiveness, you just keep breaking the commandment over and over.

Do you think Paul should have asked God’s forgiveness for slandering the sodomites in Rome? He was stating a fact.

When are you going to supply the published document that shows Baptists endorsing same-sex marriage?

Either way it might be wise for you to have a word with the moderator before continuing, since in your anger you’ve not just broken one of the ten commandments but several stickies.

Telling the truth, asking questions, and making logical inferences do not constitute slander. Several times you have been in a position to clear the air, and you refuse to do so. Dodging the question allows for a logical inference. That’s one of the rules of debating. You are not a good or fair debater. First, you refuse to answer the question posed. Then when inferences are made, you get into bloated name calling (slander).

Specify the stickies and then show the posts that you think break them.

Before you go running to the moderator, you should take a deep breath, look at all your posts, and ask yourself if you have played fair with all your name-calling.

This whole discussion could end with your saying I agree with Paul about same-sex relations being evil. But you refuse to do that. I have the right to draw my own inference. You have no right to accuse me of making false statements when all I am doing is drawing a logical inference. If the inference is false. Say it is false. Say you agree with Paul in Romans that same-sex relations are evil. Say it and I can easily withdraw my inference. REfuse to say it and the inference stands. There is nothing, repeat nothing, un-Christian about that.

 

[mek42]

mek
**
Wasn’t Romans a letter to Roman believers? Does the scope of Romans include rreplacement of the law of the land, including nonbelievers? **

The scope of Romans includes a condemnation of same-sex relations. inocente refuses to say he agrees with Paul that same-sex relations are evil. I’ve asked incocente to proivide the nbame of a Baptist publication that endorses same-sex marriage. He refuses (or cannot do so).

The scope of this discussion concerns the purpose of marriage. It is certainly not to validate same-sex sodomy. Never before our time in the history of the world do we hear of anyone but lunatic Roman emperors even entertaining such an idea. Now we have a Supreme Court Justice officiating at such an absurd wedding. Draw your own conclusion.

Yet several laws of lands accept same sex pairings as marriage. Thus, it is within the scope of this thread to discuss such pairings as a form of civil marriage.

Further, you have failed to clearly answer my own simple question. Why should you expect the same from others?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

mek

**Further, you have failed to clearly answer my own simple question. Why should you expect the same from others? **

Your question had nothing to do with the discussion between inocente and me.

Certainly it has nothing to do with Paul.

Why did you even ask it? When you explain why you asked it I will try to answer it. Otherwise it seemed a vague and irrelevant question re: our discussion.

By the way, do you agree with Saint Paul, that sodomy is wicked whether you find it in Rome or anywhere else?

Please don’t dodge the question as inocente does.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

mek
**
Yet several laws of lands accept same sex pairings as marriage. Thus, it is within the scope of this thread to discuss such pairings as a form of civil marriage. **

Actually, the laws of the land should not protect wickedness. The laws of this land protect the wicked act of murdering an unborn child. That does not make those acts any the less wicked.

The laws of this land should not protect or defend or advance or enshrine in the law anything wicked, such as pedophilia, child abuse, drug smuggling, public drunkenness, etc. Why should sodomy be an exception? Why not incest also?

 

[mek42]

mek

**Further, you have failed to clearly answer my own simple question. Why should you expect the same from others? **

Your question had nothing to do with the discussion between inocente and me.

Certainly it has nothing to do with Paul.

Why did you even ask it? When you explain why you asked it I will try to answer it. Otherwise it seemed a vague and irrelevant question re: our discussion.

By the way, do you agree with Saint Paul, that sodomy is wicked whether you find it in Rome or anywhere else?

Please don’t dodge the question as inocente does.

I don’t think that I do agree with that.

Do you believe that Christian law should be the law of the land, abided by even by non Christians?

How does an inquiry on the scope of one of Paul’s writings have nothing to do with Paul?

 

[mek42]

mek
**
Yet several laws of lands accept same sex pairings as marriage. Thus, it is within the scope of this thread to discuss such pairings as a form of civil marriage. **

Actually, the laws of the land should not protect wickedness. The laws of this land protect the wicked act of murdering an unborn child. That does not make those acts any the less wicked.

The laws of this land should not protect or defend or advance or enshrine in the law anything wicked, such as pedophilia, child abuse, drug smuggling, public drunkenness, etc. Why should sodomy be an exception? Why not incest also?

We were in post at the same time.

Is idolatry and the worship of false gods and goddesses wicked?

If so, I trust that you seek to repeal the First Amendment of the US Constitution, right?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

mek
**
How does an inquiry on the scope of one of Paul’s writings have nothing to do with Paul? **

Paul was not writing to non-Christian Romans.

You seem to want to make this (opposing sodomy) an issue exclusive to Christians. It is not. Plato and Aristotle opposed sodomy. George Washington had a sodomite drummed out of the Continental Army. Thomas Jefferson recommended a state law penalizing sodomites with castration. The horror of the wickedness of sodomy has been universal through all time.

It is not so much a matter of Christians opposing their morality on non-Christians, but of sane people standing firm against a wickedness that has plagued mankind since forever, much as incest, pedophilia, drunkenness, etc.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

mek

Is idolatry and the worship of false gods and goddesses wicked?

Yes, if you know they are false and love them anyway. Many worship money, fame, and sex as false gods. Look around you.
**
If so, I trust that you seek to repeal the First Amendment of the US Constitution, right?**

That is something the liberals probably want to do. They would likely be pleased to see priests prosecuted for refusing to officiate at gay weddings on the grounds of sexual discrimination if they refuse.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Do you believe that Christian law should be the law of the land, abided by even by non Christians?

Incidentally I’m watching a PBS documentary called “God in America” that has some discussion related to your question. It doesn’t seem to address the part of your question on non-Christians, but it does take a look at the history of trying to apply various Christian rules to groups of people within the country. I’ve only watched the first three parts of the six so far. But an ongoing theme seems to be that there’s not agreement among the various groups over whether or not a number of rules are the ones that God wants enforced or what those laws mean.

If you happen to ever be curious about it, here’s the link:

pbs.org/godinamerica/view/

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Thinking

**But an ongoing theme seems to be that there’s not agreement among the various groups over whether or not a number of rules are the ones that God wants enforced or what those laws mean. **

Yes, the proliferation and multiplicaction of Protestant groups has been the bane of Christianity in modern times. Had there been more unity among the Churches, there would have been more influence; especially if the Catholics and Protestants had joined together to defeat atheistic humanism.

However, this is relevant to the thread in that with respect to abortion and same-sex marriage, we seem to have fallen off the moral cliff.

 

[mek42]

Incidentally I’m watching a PBS documentary called “God in America” that has some discussion related to your question. It doesn’t seem to address the part of your question on non-Christians, but it does take a look at the history of trying to apply various Christian rules to groups of people within the country. I’ve only watched the first three parts of the six so far. But an ongoing theme seems to be that there’s not agreement among the various groups over whether or not a number of rules are the ones that God wants enforced or what those laws mean.

If you happen to ever be curious about it, here’s the link:

pbs.org/godinamerica/view/

Thanks!

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Yes, the proliferation and multiplicaction of Protestant groups has been the bane of Christianity in modern times.

It’s not limited to Christian groups. Has happened in Muslim and Jewish groups (and other non-Abrahamic religions). The doc does also cover how one of the Jewish groups broke off. See part 3 of the documentary for more.

 

[inocente]

inocente

I’m out all day tomorrow and look forward to seeing your evidence. Or you could just calm down and retract your slanders, up to you.

It is not a slander to keep pointing out that you keep refusing to endorse St. Paul’s condemnation of same-sex relations. If you go through your last several posts, you will see that you keep refusing to do that. Why? Could it be that you actually disagree with Paul. Do you think Paul is slandering the Romans who love their sodomy?

Whereas the sensible thing to do would have been to back off and ask God’s forgiveness, you just keep breaking the commandment over and over.

Do you think Paul should have asked God’s forgiveness for slandering the sodomites in Rome? He was stating a fact.

When are you going to supply the published document that shows Baptists endorsing same-sex marriage?

Either way it might be wise for you to have a word with the moderator before continuing, since in your anger you’ve not just broken one of the ten commandments but several stickies.

Telling the truth, asking questions, and making logical inferences do not constitute slander. Several times you have been in a position to clear the air, and you refuse to do so. Dodging the question allows for a logical inference. That’s one of the rules of debating. You are not a good or fair debater. First, you refuse to answer the question posed. Then when inferences are made, you get into bloated name calling (slander).

Specify the stickies and then show the posts that you think break them.

Before you go running to the moderator, you should take a deep breath, look at all your posts, and ask yourself if you have played fair with all your name-calling.

This whole discussion could end with your saying I agree with Paul about same-sex relations being evil. But you refuse to do that. I have the right to draw my own inference. You have no right to accuse me of making false statements when all I am doing is drawing a logical inference. If the inference is false. Say it is false. Say you agree with Paul in Romans that same-sex relations are evil. Say it and I can easily withdraw my inference. REfuse to say it and the inference stands. There is nothing, repeat nothing, un-Christian about that.

You post no evidence for your slander that I’ve “attacked St Paul” and am “defending the devil’s own work”, all you’ve done is try to justify it after you made it.

For shame, for shame.

CCC 2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way: Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.

So, DON’T make rash judgments, DON’T bare false witness, DON’T act in hate, DON’T make things worse by trying to pretend you did nothing wrong.

Now as to your false witness. Read my post #879. Then instead of taking a couple of verses out of context, re-read Romans 1:1 through to Romans 2:16 and you’ll see that Paul is teaching, and he doesn’t break off half way through to blurt out an irrelevant bigoted rant. Now actually read the lesson in full, then make your case if you really want to argue that Paul is saying all gays and lesbians, Catholics or not, worship “a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles” and have “become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy.”

 

[Charlemagne_II]

inocente

**So, DON’T make rash judgments, DON’T bare false witness, DON’T act in hate, DON’T make things worse by trying to pretend you did nothing wrong. **

You’ll never agree or admit that Paul was right in condemning sodomy.

Rant on, rant on.

Still waiting for you to cite a Baptist publication that endorses sodomy or same-sex marriage.