c.o.e. and woman bishops.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
That the Bible is anything other than a book full of BS pandering to [b]HATERS like your own sad self is your own delusional'self certified opinion' Robbie.

On the gay issue, methinks the JW doth project to much.[/b]

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
if you have issues with it then that's your affair, I have no issues with it and what is more it ignores the entire rest of the Biblical text but hey, who could ever accuse you of taking a verse in isolation and giving a distorted appraisal of it.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
That the Bible is anything other than a book full of BS pandering to [b]HATERS like your own sad self is your own delusional'self certified opinion' Robbie.

On the gay issue, methinks the JW doth project to much.[/b]

Originally posted by sonhouse
In other words you get to cherry pick which parts of the bible you believe in?

Originally posted by sonhouse
In other words you get to cherry pick which parts of the bible you believe in?

The Effects of Emasculation

http://queerfearscarewithatwist.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/effects-of-emasculation-part-i-nsfw.html

video contains some bad language and while i certainly do not endorse any of its content it raises some interesting points.

Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
Robbie, as I have said before,
the bible does not make itself clear and plain.
It uses parables and figurative language and as such anyone
can take a passage and use it to further their own argument.

How many times has one preacher disputed a point with another preacher?

If it was plain then the whole world would have one religion.

As far as I am concerned the world would be better off without ANY religion.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
again religion is not the same as spirituality, unless you apply the principals its simply a dead ritual. Christianity at its inception was all about the individual, small people really mattered, the cosmic fight over good and evil was played out on an individual level, as soon as there was a clergy laity distinction, this individuality was lost.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
again religion is not the same as spirituality, unless you apply the principals its simply a dead ritual. Christianity at its inception was all about the individual, small people really mattered, the cosmic fight over good and evil was played out on an individual level, as soon as there was a clergy laity distinction, this individuality was lost.

Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
I agree but you haven't addressed my point that anyone can use passages from the bible
to further their own argument.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
the cosmic fight is a joke though isnt it. whats the point in playing it out on an individual level when the out come has already been decided by the big man. its a fix i tell ya.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
all that literature and art and music that it inspired, from Handel to Carravagio, from Titian to Dali, hard to argue with empirical evidence isn't it Kev, clearly these great artists had a completely different view of it than you, but then again, they were only great artists. The lady doth protest too much is a nonsense, happily married for fourteen years and get this, its to a real women believe it or not.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
Well none of that literature and art is even close to being Empirical evidence concerning the veracity of biblical claims Robbie, but hey, dont let something as urbane as sanity stop you having fun and oppressing women.

So being married is proof of heterosexuality, Mmm really, btw I do not suppose you would care to guess how many of those great artist's were gay.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no its not, unless you are a psychopath that has no sense of what is moral and what is
not.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Paul wrote more books of the Bible than anyone else, that Jesus never mentioned the matter is significant how and on what basis are they disputing Pauls authorship?

Norman Perrin analyzed the Greek used by the author or authors of the Pastoral Epistles, finding that over 1/3 of their vocabulary is not used anywhere else in the Pauline epistles; more than 1/5 is not used anywhere else in the New Testament, while 2/3 of the non-Pauline vocabulary are used by 2nd century Christian writers. Richard Heard, in 1950, had this to say: "The evidence of teaching as of style and vocabulary is strongly against Paul’s authorship, nor are these arguments seriously weakened by any supposition that the epistles were written late in Paul’s lifetime and to meet a new type of situation. The three epistles show such a unity of thought and expression that they must be the work of one man, but for the author we must look rather to one of Paul’s admirers than to Paul himself."