tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post618501843972698305..comments2023-11-08T22:36:17.793-05:00Comments on SirRobert's World: Question 8....Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05255878533958017256noreply@blogger.comBlogger53125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-41239365559796379572008-11-18T14:16:00.000-05:002008-11-18T14:16:00.000-05:00Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain! He...<B>Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain! He is of no consequence!</B>Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05255878533958017256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-73080082735909291942008-11-18T13:57:00.000-05:002008-11-18T13:57:00.000-05:00wait a minute. Massachusetts has allowed gay marri...wait a minute. Massachusetts has allowed gay marriage since 2004 and that's the same year that they started reversing the flag.<BR/><BR/>WTF!?!b4d6uyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07018679794052572593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-10128032953172838792008-11-16T10:23:00.000-05:002008-11-16T10:23:00.000-05:00And we agree once again!!!! Coolness...have a goo...And we agree once again!!!! Coolness...have a good rest of the weekend friend...<BR/><BR/>=)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-82363069461386267402008-11-15T10:38:00.000-05:002008-11-15T10:38:00.000-05:00@DebIt's not terribly close-minded. It is a confi...@Deb<BR/><BR/>It's not terribly close-minded. It is a confidence in the strength of my 1st initial principle we spoke of. There <B>IS</B> the possibility that SOMETHING could crack that rather tough standard. If anyone could manage that I think we both agree it's the almighty! ;-)<BR/><BR/>R.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05255878533958017256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-19197562657644777342008-11-14T15:33:00.000-05:002008-11-14T15:33:00.000-05:00It's OK. Anonymous doesn't find it fitting to exp...It's OK. Anonymous doesn't find it fitting to explain - just to say that...umm, presumably she..does.<BR/><BR/>It would be worthwhile to engage the matter, but I don't think that it is going to happen.<BR/><BR/>JasonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-24075643076942054482008-11-14T13:15:00.000-05:002008-11-14T13:15:00.000-05:00LOL....isn't that being close minded? hmmmmLOL....isn't that being close minded? hmmmmAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-62252717410670718392008-11-14T13:03:00.000-05:002008-11-14T13:03:00.000-05:00Your confidence is noble......but i wouldn't hold ...Your confidence is noble...<BR/><BR/>...but i wouldn't hold my breath! ;-)<BR/><BR/>R.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05255878533958017256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-42899817132904565172008-11-14T12:23:00.000-05:002008-11-14T12:23:00.000-05:00I know, but you'll come around =)I know, but you'll come around =)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-47669612254719246732008-11-14T12:22:00.000-05:002008-11-14T12:22:00.000-05:00DebI wasn't expecting you to chime in. ;-)Welcome ...Deb<BR/><BR/>I wasn't expecting you to chime in. ;-)<BR/><BR/>Welcome as always.... even though we disagree! :-)<BR/><BR/>R.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05255878533958017256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-78916845489073525482008-11-14T11:57:00.000-05:002008-11-14T11:57:00.000-05:00How about over your shoulder towards Medford?????A...How about over your shoulder towards Medford?????<BR/><BR/>Anonymous...while I appreciate that you may have serious blinders on in dealing with this issue, the Bible is quite clear, as well as God about homosexual relationships.<BR/><BR/>Romans 1:26-27 “For this reason God gave them over to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged the natural sexual relations for the unnatural ones, and like wise the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed in their passions for one another. He committed shameless acts with men and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”<BR/><BR/>Not much confusion or debate here. The Bible explicitly condemns homosexuality as sin. In the Romans passage above, it’s even indicated that homosexuality is a form of punishment for itself. <BR/><BR/>Leviticus 18:22 “You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman; it is a detestable act.”<BR/><BR/>Leviticus 20:13 “If a man has sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman, the two of them have committed an abomination. They must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves.”<BR/><BR/>Before anyone starts spewing about the Old Testament scripture, and that we need to heed everything then and stone adulterers etc., just note that the condemnation of homosexuality is found in the New Testament as well….so the case is made without even mentioning Leviticus.<BR/><BR/>Furthermore, Hebrews 13:4 states: “Marriage must be honored among all and the marriage bed kept undefiled, for God will judge sexually immoral people and adulterers.” Outside of marriage, sex is prohibited. So then we get to “If two homosexuals are ‘married’ then that permits their union….uh…no<BR/><BR/>When God created a suitable mate, he did not create another man…if he found that suitable I think He coulda done it…..”That is why a man leaves his father and mother and unites with his WIFE, and they become a new family.” Genesis 2:24<BR/><BR/>Ephesians 5:22-23 explains the relationship between a man and a woman in terms of the relationship between Christ and the Church, even quoting Genesis 2:24. God hold the marriage relationship to be very important. If the Bible (which it does) speaks of marriage as between a man and a woman, (which it does) and sex as being ok only as part of a marriage (which it does) then homosexuality is not condoned by God.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-11220548050449228592008-11-14T11:17:00.000-05:002008-11-14T11:17:00.000-05:00@anonymousI appreciate your thoughts and your soli...@anonymous<BR/><BR/>I appreciate your thoughts and your solidarity.<BR/><BR/>But you may have really 'stepped in it' now!<BR/><BR/><I>Looking frightfully over his shoulder towards Gloucester!</I><BR/><BR/>R.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05255878533958017256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-67256563935064509142008-11-14T11:11:00.000-05:002008-11-14T11:11:00.000-05:00uh oh!uh oh!Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05255878533958017256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-65483305282737363832008-11-14T10:44:00.000-05:002008-11-14T10:44:00.000-05:00First time here; just passing through probably but...First time here; just passing through probably but I might be back.<BR/><BR/>Robert, love your thinking. <BR/><BR/>Jason, I'm a Christian who happens to be in a long-term, committed relationship with another woman [which would entail marriage if it were an option where I live]. I agree with you that ethics ultimately come from God, but I completely disagree with your blindness in regard to the interpretation of Scripture on this issue. <BR/><BR/>Robert's right: people have always interpreted Scripture according to their own contexts and "lenses." And those lenses are comprised of upbringing, experiences, and a variety of influences. <BR/><BR/>The vast majority of Christians in the 19th century U.S. didn't have the enlightened view of Scripture you have regarding slavery. <BR/><BR/>Is it possible that people a generation or two from now will also view the issue of homosexuality with this same benefit of hindsight and conclude that people of the early 21st century were really off base on the issue, despite their sincerity, just as do now with people in the 19th century?<BR/> <BR/><BR/>Love wins.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-84522324604132580642008-11-14T08:01:00.000-05:002008-11-14T08:01:00.000-05:00Sometimes I think I laugh too much - but not so! P...Sometimes I think I laugh too much - but not so! Poor mama, sometimes I read the posts and comments and weep uncontrollably - even my own. Just too wimpy I guess. Not sure where it came from, but from my perspective God gave me the tender heart, at least I give Him the blame! LOL ! Keep the pyre on the shelf!Indian Lake Papahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14361870682375345469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-23201563827973782172008-11-14T05:32:00.000-05:002008-11-14T05:32:00.000-05:00at least we can laugh....no one is getting a pyre ...at least we can laugh....<BR/><BR/>no one is getting a pyre ready for the other! ;-)<BR/><BR/>...yet!<BR/><BR/>R.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05255878533958017256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-52438452189055584542008-11-13T23:42:00.000-05:002008-11-13T23:42:00.000-05:00heh. heavy whipping, indeed."We get confused over...heh. heavy whipping, indeed.<BR/><BR/>"We get confused over this."<BR/><BR/>What's this "we" crap. You got a pet turd?<BR/><BR/>JAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-55987415387390270922008-11-13T22:39:00.000-05:002008-11-13T22:39:00.000-05:001 Corinthians 13Thus sayeth the Lord. No, sorry.Th...1 Corinthians 13<BR/><BR/>Thus sayeth the Lord. <BR/><BR/>No, sorry.<BR/><BR/>Thus sayeth, Paul.<BR/><BR/>We get confused over this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-80871289256036360312008-11-13T22:21:00.000-05:002008-11-13T22:21:00.000-05:00Ah... Satan's Delight. Best served with creme frai...Ah... Satan's Delight. Best served with creme fraiche, although some have settled for heavy whipping cream. But remember, light on the the cinnamon my boy, light on the cinnamon!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-62939219016071413422008-11-13T21:19:00.000-05:002008-11-13T21:19:00.000-05:00What about just plain "Thus saith the Lord" As a r...What about just plain "Thus saith the Lord" As a reason for beliving something. There is NO reason for a believer to be wishy-washy where God has made it plain, and say "I believe, based on MY beliefs,as if it is somehow out of place to say what God has already said! Are we believers a bunch of wimps? Or do we entertain doubts about scripture's authority, to our shame and Satan's delight?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-72919919221634910762008-11-13T21:12:00.000-05:002008-11-13T21:12:00.000-05:00I guess Jesus lost His 'Christian composure' on a ...I guess Jesus lost His 'Christian composure' on a number of occasions, huh? <BR/><BR/>What does 'Christian composure' look like anyway? Is it defined somewhere in scripture? Or is it miss-defined based on passages taken out of context?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-433531180707973592008-11-13T17:50:00.000-05:002008-11-13T17:50:00.000-05:00papa - we did the same thing here out west. no fig...papa - we did the same thing here out west. no fight, no mess, just did what we were allowed to, legally, and exercised our voice and right to do so. simple as that.<BR/><BR/>robert, you are just as passionate on this as i am from the other side. so i can understand where youre coming from in that respect.<BR/><BR/>you know i dont agree with same sex...anything, or abortion due to my standards and morals based on my beliefs and partly based on personal experience. and i can vote certain things in or out of law based on my freedom to do so...which i will continue to do. and in the end, as i believe, God will have the final say. in the meantime...it is His job and right to convict the hearts of man. while it is my job to live in a manner that is pleasing to Him (which admittedly, i do not always do) but i try like heck, and hopefully, prayerfully, my life can make a positive difference for anothers. time will tell...Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01000597076912773169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-48205174216637964472008-11-13T17:14:00.000-05:002008-11-13T17:14:00.000-05:00yeah, papa's glad you feel strongly about...sumpth...yeah, papa's glad you feel strongly about...sumpthin.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-62072489854150217282008-11-13T17:07:00.000-05:002008-11-13T17:07:00.000-05:00PapaI'm glad someone does....:)R.Papa<BR/><BR/>I'm glad someone does....<BR/><BR/>:)<BR/><BR/>R.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05255878533958017256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-77363756581584989172008-11-13T16:46:00.000-05:002008-11-13T16:46:00.000-05:00Greetings Robert! You created a storm here! :o) So...Greetings Robert! You created a storm here! :o) Some kind of lost their Christian composure! It is probably one of the most controversial subjects in the USA. A few years ago the state of Michigan put the marriage issue on the ballot. there was a petition circulated that put it on the ballot. They needed over 300,000 signatures, There was over 400,000 I believe. I obtained 200 signatures myself and my daughter did the same. We did not rant and rave, we put our beliefs into action, and the ballot vote went the way we were praying for. Not a lot of rhetoric - just followed the legal steps. Anyways that's how papa handled it. Have a great day, I may not agree the same as you, but I appreciate your perspective on the issues - makes this old man think and I take what you say seriously. Have a great day.Indian Lake Papahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14361870682375345469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-2334037966492568362008-11-13T16:28:00.000-05:002008-11-13T16:28:00.000-05:00“What I mean is the state should not be pronouncin...“What I mean is the state should not be pronouncing judgment as to the moral standing in a religious context of one relationship over another.”<BR/><BR/>I’m not sure what you didn’t understand about reading your own post. “Religious context.” what? You are trying to back door concepts again so that you can revise what you said and reframe it in a way which doesn’t resemble at all what you first said. You do this a lot.<BR/><BR/>“I'd be willing to bet that's how many lived, and how many would like things to be again today. I have heard such from many who proclaim themselves as Christ-followers... some of them even female.”<BR/><BR/>There you go! Proof! Sample size of Robert and the people he talks to, clearly a statistically significant sample. A cursory look at history indicates that your tin-foil-hat view of Christian morality is as selective and subjective as nearly everything else you have said to this point.<BR/><BR/>Every concept can and has been abused. The fact that ideas have been misused says nothing about the ideas themselves, it only speaks to the fact that people suck, and your constant citation of abuses, without addressing the missuses and abiblical ideas behind them is part of the problem.<BR/><BR/>“Is everything all or nothing with you?”<BR/><BR/>Robert it isn’t just an issue of finding what you like and leaving the rest. When you want to talk high-minded and moral you vaguely cite the founding fathers and the constitution, as if you are crossing yourself while passing the dead (actually that is exactly what you are doing) but then when the rubber meets the road, you equivocate in the matter. You dodge your purported love of our heritage when the crap hits the rhetorical fan almost every time.<BR/><BR/>“America is a study in dichotomy and double-speak!”<BR/><BR/>Stop talking about this like it is a Petrie dish. You are making real time assertions about leveraging real influence in order to bring about real time civic changes. And you cite ‘rights’ as the basis for doing so. This is not an angels on the head of a pin question, your listless aphorisms indicate only that your highmindedness has yet to meet the quickly moving, hot pavement below – that “rights” is a meaningless concept to you. A study in double speak…you can be certain I’m going to hold that batch of idiocy over your head a lot.<BR/><BR/>"all citizens deserve equal protection under the law of a state"<BR/><BR/>My issue with this is that it does not go towards explaining how it could possibly apply HERE. You are saying this in a context. From what are those homosexuals who want to be “married” being protected and how is there an inequity. Laws are specific – you are not. These ideas have real world applications, what do those words mean. <BR/><BR/>“The unstated reference was to my later question;”<BR/><BR/>O, welcome to revisionism island, I am Mr. Rourke, your host. Let me say it again, the two propostions do not follow. It doesn’t matter if you did an interpretive dance sequence later, they still are incongruent.<BR/><BR/>“Most Biblical interpretations generally stem from a preconceived idea.”<BR/><BR/>Actually I would say that ALL communication is based on a preconceived idea, it is called context, and it is the clear concept which eludes most Christians completely. And there is no way to contextually, honestly to come away from the bible with an idea that slavery is endorsed by God. Saying THAT people did it pointedly avoids their exegesis in ariving at such a reading.<BR/><BR/>And in the context of slavery and its abolition, the reasoning on the matter had very little to do with, as you put it, “general societal view point.” Their reasoning was based, primarily, in the fact that people are made in the image of God, that they have inate value. This obviously goes towards the issue of “rights”. In the world that you want, the state distributes rights as they see fit. However the political or cultural wind may be blowing is how “rights” are to be applied. But rights do not come from other people, they come from the creator. There is no philosophical way around this. <BR/><BR/>So, you say that the 13th amendment righted a wrong. What made it wrong? <BR/><BR/> “I'll ask YOU another question is something Good or Evil because the God you bend your knee to says it is or does goodness or evil exist independently of Him?”<BR/><BR/>Since you’re doing everything you can to change the subject and move on, presumably you have given up on defending your moral moorings. <BR/><BR/>I think I understand what you are trying to ask, but since you are asking it you also must know that it is falsely dichotomous. There doesn’t have to be an ‘or’ in there. <BR/><BR/>God is good and says what is good. God understands evil because he knows what happens apart from his goodness.<BR/><BR/>You recognize basic goodness. You know it when you see it. Of course that gets gravely distorted in those who have given themselves to that which they know to be wrong. We have all experienced this in one form or another. We know that we are doing something wrong, we know that it is a bad idea, but we do it anyway, determining to resist the one in whose image we are made, determining our individuality, our own minigod. For instance, your healthy reluctance in matters of abortion is not able to squelch your view that “personal freedom” (read: sexual and lifestyle conveniece) must be the prime motivator in this debate. You turn your head, hoping to avoid the image of our own modern child sacrifice to the god of personal freedom burned into your retina forever. You don’t want to see, because you know it is wrong. But that doesn’t stop you from asserting that it is right. You recognize goodness, but you choose otherwise, showing that you would rather be god than do what is right.<BR/><BR/>Another example is the death of a loved one. Even the most vibrant Christian – knowing that the loved one is at the foot of Christ, infinitely happy to be in a completely selfless state, aware of nothing but him and his beauty - experiences loss. Why should such a think be? I say because death is just not the way it’s supposed to be. We know that death is evil, and we recoil at it. We are designed and our image reflects our inate push to relationship with others who also bear the imago dei, and as Christ cried out on the Cross, mourning a loss which he had never experienced, he demonstrated the complete version of what we experience greatly, greatly smaller when one we love dies. We recoil at the evil of it. But we still know it.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, this is a lot, lot, loooooooooooot, longer than this, and I’m sure that it will fire you up, which is great –<BR/><BR/>but know that these things have interpersonal application. These things have application in everything that we are. You ask:<BR/><BR/>You telling me that you have this all figured out?<BR/><BR/>No, my goodness sakes, I do not have it figured out. I do however, by no virtue or determination or activity of my own, have a great and glorious something - instead of absolutely nothing.<BR/><BR/>s'later<BR/><BR/>JasonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com