Throwing out the baby with the bathwater
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Clams are inherently bad
- Thread starter Maddog
- Start date
- Status
Well there are some bugs that God did allow, and we know about John the Baptist. As much as I can't stand Al Gore, I can't stand in judgment for him on that particular dietary habit, which I voluntarily restrict myself from enduring.
While I wouldn't say that anything @Mark C has said here, goes against the rules, this post here does seem to at least push the limits a bit.
the simple quoting of scripture is now antithetical to this group? oh my
Quoting Scripture is one thing. His personal commentary where he comments on pork not being food in his opinion, steps into the realm of discussions we are forbidden to have, whether in favor of or against that opine. I mean he goes even further to opine that those who disagree with him are serving a counterfeit Christ!
I'm tempted to simply quote II Corinthians 11:4, and the context, but that too may be "now antithetical to this group."
We have reached the place many of us warned about, IMHO.
And, come to think of it, I'm really happy that YHVH didn't warn against drinking antifreeze...
Man_in_the_Middle
Seasoned Member
That is a false accusation.
The quote was, "If the "Christ" you serve is in violation of the laws of nature - perhaps he's a counterfeit Christ that the real one warned about?"
That is a brotherly warning that if you see that your understanding of what Christ is teaching is in violation of the laws of nature, then as a Christian who is warned in the bible to be wary of false christs, that this may be something to consider. As a fundamental aspect of christian teaching.
Nowhere did he say that if you disagree with him, you are indeed serving a false christ. Watchman on the wall style... You do what you will with that caution...
I really do wonder:
If a self-described Gay Guy wanting two "wives" came here, knowing full well that more of the 'churches' in this world, and especially the English-speaking world, would welcome him more than most of us -- EXCEPT for the "there can be only one" thing --
would my posts quoting those "OT" verses that warn similarly of "curses for disobedience" be hit with the Dreaded Delete Button then?
I wouldn't even suggest such a one was "going to hell," just that he might end up wherever* a bit sooner...
But I could certainly do so by quoting Scripture ALONE, and some here would even connect those dots.
----------------------------
* Come to think of it - as I DID WARN, in another thread on this very site, today.
I do egg and corned beef, or egg and beef pastrami. Works just as wellBacon and egg pie never tastes good without bacon.
.
This is a really good example of how good shellfish are at cleaning the water. They're brilliant filterers, which is why God has created them. They're a great asset to the ecosystem. But all the gunk that they've filtered out, including any pollution and bad chemicals, they have taken inside of themselves. That's not something you want to be eating, regardless of what the Bible says about them.
Wow! Like I said, Don't eat the sewage treatment plant!
Using that standard, the same can be said about polygyny. For example, someone can say “Polygyny is evil - regardless of what the Bible says about it.” If you point to them the Scripture that says polygyny - if done according to the Word - is holy righteous and good; they can easily dismantle your argument by bringing up the instructions of what’s food and what’s not. “If you can cherry pick, then why can’t I?”
No one on staff here has declared the topic of homosexuality off limits for discussion, and you know that!I really do wonder:
If a self-described Gay Guy wanting two "wives" came here, knowing full well that more of the 'churches' in this world, and especially the English-speaking world, would welcome him more than most of us -- EXCEPT for the "there can be only one" thing --
would my posts quoting those "OT" verses that warn similarly of "curses for disobedience" be hit with the Dreaded Delete Button then?
I wouldn't even suggest such a one was "going to hell," just that he might end up wherever* a bit sooner...
But I could certainly do so by quoting Scripture ALONE, and some here would even connect those dots.
----------------------------
* Come to think of it - as I DID WARN, in another thread on this very site, today.
NO IT IS NOT!!!!!! Here is what he said prior to that statement
Don't accuse me of making FALSE ACCUSATIONS, when the FACTS SPEAK OTHERWISE!!!!!!
It's called "irony," and even an "analogy." Please don't pretend you can't see that.
No, but the commentary does.
It was a true accusation. The claim that calling pork food is against the laws of nature violates the rules of the forum.
Are you implying that homosexuality wouldn’t fall under sexual immorality? It seems you completely failed to grasp my argument.I really do wonder:
If a self-described Gay Guy wanting two "wives" came here, knowing full well that more of the 'churches' in this world, and especially the English-speaking world, would welcome him more than most of us -- EXCEPT for the "there can be only one" thing --
would my posts quoting those "OT" verses that warn similarly of "curses for disobedience" be hit with the Dreaded Delete Button then?
I wouldn't even suggest such a one was "going to hell," just that he might end up wherever* a bit sooner...
But I could certainly do so by quoting Scripture ALONE, and some here would even connect those dots.
----------------------------
* Come to think of it - as I DID WARN, in another thread on this very site, today.
- Status