Should same-sex marriage become legal?

Judged:

1

1

1

Kom2 wrote:

<quoted text>
My friend, forget not that he gave us a choice. God gave us FreeWill to do what we want and Belive in what we want. He could have instead forced us to Belive in him, but he did not because He wanted Obedience, he wanted us to Love him from our own Hearts. We send ourselves to Hell, not God. We choose to either go up the Path to Jesus, or down the Path to Hell.

Judged:

1

1

1

Kom2 wrote:

<quoted text>
My friend, Jeremiah 1:5,
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”
He knew us all before we were even born, he gave us Freewill to do as we want.

Judged:

2

2

2

WasteWater wrote:

<quoted text>
1. The earth isn't flat. Never was and never will be.
2. Ice is not the same thing as liquid.
3. Biblical history is limited to 10,000 years.
The earth cannot be flooded because if you read the article in its entirety, you would also have read about continental drift and ripples of the earth's crust which is constantly in motion.
Nice try though.
The Flood never happened within the last 10,000 years.

Judged:

7

6

4

No Surprise wrote:

<quoted text>
1. You better read some geology on this before you stick to that non-sense.
2. Are you nuts? Ice is frozen H2O. Warm it up and you have liquid called water. Scientists have been figuring out how much glacier ice there is to know how much the sea levels would rise if it all melted in the next 300+ years.
Continental drift happens to slow to affect anything like a flood if it happened. I also challenge you to Google the following terminology... "drop stones".
3. Wrong. A single writer of the Bible gave an estimation, not Bible history. But we know the Bible knocks that estimation off balance. You are correct that a tradition of a scripture has Christians believing in a time estimate that has proven to have it's own problems.

Judged:

1

1

1

No Surprise wrote:

<quoted text>
1. You better read some geology on this before you stick to that non-sense.
2. Are you nuts? Ice is frozen H2O. Warm it up and you have liquid called water. Scientists have been figuring out how much glacier ice there is to know how much the sea levels would rise if it all melted in the next 300+ years.
Continental drift happens to slow to affect anything like a flood if it happened. I also challenge you to Google the following terminology... "drop stones".
3. Wrong. A single writer of the Bible gave an estimation, not Bible history. But we know the Bible knocks that estimation off balance. You are correct that a tradition of a scripture has Christians believing in a time estimate that has proven to have it's own problems.

WasteWater wrote:

<quoted text>
Ice is different than liquid. For example, one can walk on and drive vehicles on ice. Have you ever heard of treading water?
Scientists know exactly how much water is in ice packs. I already provided credible links to that information.
There are many Bible experts who put the Biblical time-line at around 10,000 years or less. When we eliminate the literal Word of God the Bible becomes irrelevant to science and the Flood becomes what it really is, a myth.

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Whatever.
The flood story in the Buy-bull is absurd. Assuming it was meant to be taken literally, it was written by people who were ignorant when it came to cosmology, and had no idea of the scope of life on earth.
In Buy-bull cosmology, the earth is flat, and the sky is solid.

Judged:

1

1

1

No Surprise wrote:

<quoted text>
At one time, the Hittite empire the Bible raged about was a fairy tale to. The city of Ur was another fairy tale. King Daivd was a myth. Sodom and Gomorah was a myth. Lions in Israel was a myth.
As someone said once, the absence of evidence doesn't mean the evidence doesn't/didn't exist. It just means it hasn't been found yet :)

Judged:

3

3

1

No Surprise wrote:

<quoted text>
First off, we're dealing with a story.
Second, the 1000 years for 1 day is obviously incorrect. Even bible scholars admit it isn't correct.
Third, you wish to pretend the earth at the time of this flood story is as it is now. but according to science and the Bible it wasn't.
Fourth, in Genesis it states the earth at creation was a "single" island, not shaped as it is now.
Fifth, that means the story of this flood according to Biblical information took place when the earth was a single land mass.
Sixth, when the earth has been a single land mass according to science, few mountains/mountain ranges existed. The earth was essentially a "flat surface".
Seventh, in order for a "being" with powers to flood this earth, logic of geology would dictate the ocean/sea floors would have to be risen to dry land level. Ground water would have to be forced upwards also. With low mountains in this theory, global flooding would be entirely possible.
Fourth,

Judged:

4

2

2

No Surprise wrote:

<quoted text>
At one time, the Hittite empire the Bible raged about was a fairy tale to. The city of Ur was another fairy tale. King Daivd was a myth. Sodom and Gomorah was a myth. Lions in Israel was a myth.
As someone said once, the absence of evidence doesn't mean the evidence doesn't/didn't exist. It just means it hasn't been found yet :)

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
Assuming what you claim is accurate...
Cities exist. Kings exist. Lions exist. There is nothing inherently absurd and impossible about a city named Ur, a king named David, or lions living in Israel. The Sodom and Gomorrah story is a myth. Were there cities with those names? Maybe. But the fact there is a Baker St in a city called "London" doesn't make the Sherlock Holmes stories any less fictional.
There is no "firmament", and the whole flood story is absurd. I really don't see how anybody over 6 years old can believe it actually happened.

WasteWater wrote:

<quoted text>
So it is a story which is not factual. Agree?
The Bible time line is faulty. Agree?
Since the flood is mythology, and given we have no idea where it might or might not have happened and when, the Biblical flood has no bearing on scientific fact. Agree?
The Genesis creation if faulty. The stars and the the earth and all that is in our universe that we can see with our technology, basically occurred simultaneously billions of years ago, long before man existed. Agree?
The earth was never anything other than a sphere. Agree?
I already explained why using all the water it is impossible to flood the world as the Bible says. What's more, such a flood has never occurred during man's limited existence upon the earth. Agree?

WasteWater wrote:

<quoted text>
Please define myth as you understand it too be.

No Surprise wrote:

<quoted text>
In after thought of new evidence you can say that of what we know exists. But just a mere century ago, most all of the Bible was one complete fairy tale to science, scholars and the educated and to most of the populace that weren't religious or had little religion/belief in their life.
Do you know that on top of the tallest mountains of the world you can find sea fossils and ancient snail type shells having once been the home of sea creatures laying on the ground, under the snow and ice that melts away each summer? These mountains are a mile to a few miles high or more.
Scientists say these fossils and shells are from now extinct seas and oceans that the mountain was once a sea/ocean floor of. That as the crust and heaved, that floor pushed up and up and up till it became a mountain, taking with it the ocean/sea floor fossils/shells to it's peak and that is how they got there.
Enters the matter of erosion. Erosion happens over millions of years, shrinking the height of those mountains but leaving those fossils and shells in place. A rather convient explanation one would think.
See with that explanation, one should be able to follow the erosion of the mountain down wards and finds tens of thousands and more fossils and shells all around it's base, on top of the ground and buried for many feet deep. The streams and rivers coming from these mountains would have carried those fossils and shells to the end of their course. It should be a huge dumping ground of fossils and shells.
But none of that exists as it should if what they say is correct. Therefore they can't be correct. Therefore it just remains a plausible theory, to explain how ocean fossils and shells ended up on the tops of mountains from a mile to a few miles high in height and, not being washed away by erosion.
There is no way to prove a flood happened. But neither is there any way to prove it didn't happen.

Judged:

2

2

1

dances with weebles wrote:

<quoted text>
no, goofy... that was only jeremiah... nobody else.

Judged:

2

2

1

Just Think wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah, yeah, yeah...you've spouted this line before. God doesn't WANT to send people to hell...he just HAS to.
Your god is sick.

Judged:

2

2

1

Just Think wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah, yeah, yeah...you've spouted this line before. God doesn't WANT to send people to hell...he just HAS to.
Your god is sick.

Kom2 wrote:

<quoted text>
My friend, this is not what I have said. What I say is that God does NOT want anyone to go to Hell, but WE send ourselves there.
What do you mean by sick? Was it sick when Jesus saw each sin and was tormented by Satan as he stood before Christ accusing man of being unworthy of such a sacrifice?

Kom2 wrote:

<quoted text>
My friend, this is not what I said. What I said was that God does NOT want anyone to go to Hell, but WE send ourselves there because we choose too.
What do you mean sick?
Was it sick when Jesus went through a agony in the Garden where he took on all the sin?
He saw each sin and was tormented by Satan as he stood before Christ accusing man of being unworthy of such a sacrifice.
Was it sick when Jesus was arrested and dragged by ropes and chains to be accused by the priests, along the way he was mocked kicked and punched,even spat on, he was judged by false witnesses and sentenced to death by the people claiming to represent God?
Was it sick when Jesus was Whipped and had his flesh torn of exposing his bones?
Was it sick when Jesus Had nails hammered into his hands and feet. He was lifted up and hung. He suffered severely as the heart and lungs where no longer able to work, he affixated and this is the worst way to die. He could hardly speak but managed to by raising his body to free the lungs,to get a breath to speak,His body shook and his nerves all exposed shot unbelievable pain through his body.
Was it sick when Lastly he had to look into the eyes of his Mother standing in agony at the foot of the cross to tell her that he will make things new, and when he looked up into the Heavens and told his Father that IT IS FINISHED.
My friend, I dont find anything sick with Jesus dieing for us.