David and Jonathan

[david_x]

Then until you decide to procede with these lines of inquiry, I will accept that as a concession of defeat.

Belive a lie? Imagine that.

I am not admitting defeat in any way shape or form. I am just following the rules of the forum.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I am not admitting defeat in any way shape or form. I am just following the rules of the forum.

Nevertheless, you have ceased these lines of inquiry. This is, for all intents and purposes, declaring your defeat. We are having a logical debate, and the CF rules do not dictate to the contrary.
Of course, you can pick it up again if and when you wish, and your concession will be retracted. But until then...

 

[david_x]

Nevertheless, you have ceased these lines of inquiry. This is, for all intents and purposes, declaring your defeat. We are having a logical debate, and the CF rules do not dictate to the contrary.
Of course, you can pick it up again if and when you wish, and your concession will be retracted. But until then...

I clearly hijacked the thread which is completly against the rules.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I clearly hijacked the thread which is completly against the rules.

Nevertheless, the CF rules do not imply that our discussion was anything other than a logical debate. Any other transgressions you may have made are irrelevant.

 

[david_x]

Back to point. David and Jonathan are straight.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Wiccan_child,

It affects me because the majority of the anti-gay movement is Christian.

You said the Bible affects your life as a Wiccan, I asked you how the Bible affects your life, not who was anti-gay. How do you define anti-gay? As far as I can tell from what you are saying some Christians who are homosexuals would be anti-gay. But I don’t believe in Wicca so it doesn’t bother me, so why would you be bothered in what the Bible says, it seems there is your objection to my Bible as opposed to my respect for your Wiccan beliefs.
So how do you feel about Islam’s attitude to homosexuality and treatment of homosexuals?

If can be evidenced from the narrative itself. I suggest you look up my past posts on the issue.

I haven’t seen any evidence that is anything more than assumption and I don’t see how it could fit in with the rest of the Bible or what Jesus taught.

What is the Wiccan position on same-sex sex?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

You said the Bible affects your life as a Wiccan,

No, I did not. I explained how it affects my life as an open homosexual. My faith was not mentioned.

I asked you how the Bible affects your life, not who was anti-gay.

The Bible affects me because the majority of those who are anti-gay are so because of their interpretation of the Bible. In this way, the Bible affects me. I figured it was obvious that the Bible doesn't directly affect me; it is, after all, just a book.

How do you define anti-gay?

The religio-political stance where one opposes the advocation of equal rights to homosexuals.
By comparison, pro-gay is the religio-political stance where one supports the advocation of equal rights to homosexuals.

As far as I can tell from what you are saying some Christians who are homosexuals would be anti-gay.

Indeed.

But I don’t believe in Wicca so it doesn’t bother me, so why would you be bothered in what the Bible says, it seems there is your objection to my Bible as opposed to my respect for your Wiccan beliefs.

While I respect your beliefs in and of themselves, I object to them when they are pushed onto the state. Seperation of the Church and State exists for a reason.

So how do you feel about Islam’s attitude to homosexuality and treatment of homosexuals?

I am opposed to any and all forms of inciting hate.

What is the Wiccan position on same-sex sex?

An excerpt from the Charge of the Goddess:
Sing, feast, dance, make music and love, all in My Presence, for Mine is the ecstasy of the spirit and Mine also is joy on earth.
Sex is to be rejoyced, whatever it's form (bearing in mind Wiccan morality: harm none).

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Wiccan_child,

No, I did not. I explained how it affects my life as an open homosexual. My faith was not mentioned.

No that’s not quite right either, it is true you didn’t say Wiccan, that was assumption, I apologise for that assumption, but the question was why you were bothered about the account of Jonathan and David in the Bible. You don’t believe more than a dozen Bible passages and accounts that exclude or condemn same-sex sex but you seem bothered about this one because it affects your life as a homosexual. That to me suggests you are arguing primarily as a homosexual who happens to be a wiccan, your icon is wiccan. I am primarily a Christian, my sexuality is Christian because despite my urges and temptations my desire is to follow Jesus teaching and please God with all my heart and with all my soul and with all my mind. Which requires seeking to obey all Jesus taught. John 14. I hope that explains the reason for my assumption.

The religio-political stance where one opposes the advocation of equal rights to homosexuals.

By comparison, pro-gay is the religio-political stance where one supports the advocation of equal rights to homosexuals.

Indeed.

Exactly! indeed as you confirm what you are saying is some Christians who are homosexuals would be anti-gay, yet you define anti-gay as a religious stance against homosexuals? Seems to me you are just primarily anti-Christian as if you were really for equal rights for homosexuals, you would at least take into account the views of homosexuals who were Christians.

Ok that’s cool at least I know your motives. Thanks for being honest

While I respect your beliefs in and of themselves, I object to them when they are pushed onto the state. Seperation of the Church and State exists for a reason.

Except that I am a citizen of the state and I have views the same as you have views, I don’t see why your views as a citizen should overrule mine as a citizen?

I am opposed to any and all forms of inciting hate.

Ah inciting hate. How do you define inciting hate?

An excerpt from the Charge of the Goddess:

Sing, feast, dance, make music and love, all in My Presence, for Mine is the ecstasy of the spirit and Mine also is joy on earth.
Sex is to be rejoyced, whatever it's form (bearing in mind Wiccan morality: harm none).

Ok thanks I have learn’t something. Can I ask who the Goddess is please?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

No that’s not quite right either, it is true you didn’t say Wiccan, that was assumption, I apologise for that assumption, but the question was why you were bothered about the account of Jonathan and David in the Bible.

You said: I asked you how the Bible affects your life, not who was anti-gay. Are you changing the question again?

You don’t believe more than a dozen Bible passages and accounts that exclude or condemn same-sex sex but you seem bothered about this one because it affects your life as a homosexual. That to me suggests you are primarily a homosexual who happens to be a wiccan, your icon is wiccan.

Non sequitur. How does the former suggest the latter? My homosexuality is evident by my stating that I am a homosexual. My Wiccan faith is, as you said, evident by my faith icon. But perhaps some clarification is in order:
I do not believe that the Bible is anything more than a book. I do not believe that it is literally, or even metaphorically, true. I concede that it is helpful to people, and I admit that some parts of it coincide with my own beliefs, and with the scientific consensus.
The reason I am focused on the story of Jonathan and David in this thread is because this thread's topic is the story of Jonathan and David, and their suspected homosexuality. I do not have an opinion on whether the narrative concerning them happened, but my interest is purely to combat the anti-gay movement, as I see it.

I am primarily a Christian, my sexuality is Christian because despite my urges and temptations my desire is to follow Jesus teaching and please God with all my heart and with all my soul and with all my mind. Which requires seeking to obey all Jesus taught. John 14. I hope that explains the reason for my assumption.

It does not. But let us not dwell on it.

Exactly! indeed as you confirm what you are saying is some Christians who are homosexuals would be anti-gay, yet you define anti-gay as a religious stance against homosexuals? Seems to me you are just primarily anti-Christian as if you were really for equal rights for homosexuals you would at ;least take into account the views of homosexuals who were religious.

'Anti-gay' is a religio-political stance. That is, it is a stance stemming from religion and/or politics. So yes, some anti-gays may be gay themselves. By way of comparison, not all women supported women's rights in the early 20th century.

except I am a citizen of the state and I have views the same as you, I don’t see why your views as a citizen should overrule mine as a citizen?

Ah inciting hate. How do you define inciting hate?

I'm not sure how to make it any simpler. Which part do you not understand?

Ok thanks I have learn’t something. Can I ask who the Goddess is please?

Of course. The Goddess is one of two deities whom I worship.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Wiccan_Child,

You said: I asked you how the Bible affects your life, not who was anti-gay. Are you changing the question again?

let me clarify. The thread is about David and Jonathan, that’s a biblical account, I was merely asking why you are so bothered about a Biblical account unless you believe it has some truth; if you don’t believe the Bible is true why would you be bothered about what it says.

The reason I am focused on the story of Jonathan and David in this thread is because this thread's topic is the story of Jonathan and David, and their suspected homosexuality. I do not have an opinion on whether the narrative concerning them happened, but my interest is purely to combat the anti-gay movement, as I see it.

Then maybe you should refer to their suspected gayness as I don’t think some homosexuals who are Christians believe they were homosexual.

It does not. But let us not dwell on it.

Well it is important if you have any interest in what I am saying, it would be good as we are on a debating forum if we explored where the other is coming from. It explains why my sexuality is a faith based orientation rather than a sexual based one.

So yes, some anti-gays may be gay themselves. By way of comparison, not all women supported women's rights in the early 20th century.

yes I don’t need the comparison as I am making the comparison to you. But you made the contradictory statement about equal rights for homosexuals when you didn’t take into account the rights of homosexuals who are Christians and believe same-sex sex is wrong. So I don’t think any gays are anti-gay but I would accept that some homosexuals definitely are

Also, my quote didn’t come out…I repeat , except I am a citizen of the state and I have views the same as you, I don’t see why your views as a citizen should overrule mine as a citizen?

I'm not sure how to make it any simpler. Which part do you not understand?

all of it. How do you define hate? I don’t hate anyone, I am however against some sexual practices, but although I am against prostitution, I don’t hate prostitutes, I am against adultery, but I don’t hate adulterers, I am against paedophilia, but do you think that is inciting hate against paeophiles? I don’t hate them and I don’t think so.

Of course. The Goddess is one of two deities whom I worship.

Ok but I worship and follow Jesus Christ, the Son of God whom many have seen and testify about. Can I ask you have you seen these deities or has anyone? How do you know they exist? The reason I ask is, you recently doubted the testimony of ex-gays

Testimony is insufficient without supporting objective data.

Today, 12:05 AM Post #6 on the Some people I read about thread
So you must have seen these dieties.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

let me clarify. The thread is about David and Jonathan, that’s a biblical account, I was merely asking why you are so bothered about a Biblical account unless you believe it has some truth; if you don’t believe the Bible is true why would you be bothered about what it says.

I have answered this many times, in this and other threads, to you and other members.

Then maybe you should refer to their suspected gayness as I don’t think some homosexuals who are Christians believe they were homosexual.

I do not understand. I did refer to their suspected 'gayness'. I made a case supporting thier homosexuality. I accept that not all gay Christians believe that Jonathan and David were homosexual lovers, but that is irrelevant to my point.

Well it is important if you have any interest in what I am saying, it would be good as we are on a debating forum if we explored where the other is coming from. It explains why my sexuality is a faith based orientation rather than a sexual based one.

One's sexual orientation is defined by the sexes that one is attracted to. Nothing more, nothing less. I do not see why the cause is pertinant.

yes I don’t need the comparison as I am making the comparison to you.

Quite.

But you made the contradictory statement about equal rights for homosexuals when you didn’t take into account the rights of homosexuals who are Christians and believe same-sex sex is wrong. So I don’t think any gays are anti-gay but I would accept that some homosexuals definitely are

I do not see any contradiction in my words; one's stance on homosexuality, and one's sexuality, are independant. Being gay does not preclude one being anti-gay.
Indeed, you contradict yourself: you talk of homosexual Christians who believe that same-sex sex is wrong, and then say that there are no anti-gay gays.

except I am a citizen of the state and I have views the same as you, I don’t see why your views as a citizen should overrule mine as a citizen?

They should not. Seperation of the Church and State is to stop any religious organisation from influencing the State and it's decisions to further their own ends. Of course, if all citizens of the US supported the discrimination of homosexuals, for whatever reason, then the majority would rule.
Your individual rights are not imposed upon, but religious organisations are constitutionally blocked from imposing on our respective governments.

all of it. How do you define hate? I don’t hate anyone, I am however against some sexual practices, but although I am against prostitution, I don’t hate prostitutes, I am against adultery, but I don’t hate adulterers, I am against paedophilia, but do you think that is inciting hate against paeophiles? I don’t hate them and I don’t think so.

In the context of our discussion, 'inciting hatred against A' is promoting prejudice against A.

Ok but I worship and follow Jesus Christ, the Son of God whom many have seen and testify about. Can I ask you have you seen these deities or has anyone? How do you know they exist? The reason I ask is, you recently doubted the testimony of ex-gays
Today, 12:05 AM Post #6 on the Some people I read about thread
So you must have seen these dieties.

You misunderstand. Testimony is insufficient because subjective evidence cannot be externally verified. However, subjective evidence can be used internally, that is, divine communiqué can be used as supporting evidence of said divine's existance. Unfortunately, by the nature of subjective evidence, this is useless when trying to convince other of one's experiances.
To that end, I have never tried to convince someone of my religious beliefs.
I also question whether you have 'seen' Jesus to the same scrutiny that you would have me see my gods.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Wiccan_Child,

I have answered this many times, in this and other threads, to you and other members.

ok so you seem bothered because God’s word in the Bible is anti-same-sex sex.

I do not understand. I did refer to their suspected 'gayness'. I made a case supporting thier homosexuality. I accept that not all gay Christians believe that Jonathan and David were homosexual lovers, but that is irrelevant to my point.

No its my point. if some homosexuals are Christians and believe same-sex sex is wrong your claims to equal rights for homosexuals are false. That’s why I am happy to assume gay means practicing homosexuals as opposed to all homosexuals.

One's sexual orientation is defined by the sexes that one is attracted to. Nothing more, nothing less. I do not see why the cause is pertinant.

Ah no not for Christians, we don’t define people by their sexual desires, but by desires to follow Jesus in all matters sexual and everything else.

They should not. Seperation of the Church and State is to stop any religious organisation from influencing the State and it's decisions to further their own ends.

Sorry how does that work then?? Yes I agree that separation of church and state stops any religious organisation influencing the state as a religious organisation, but that’s not my point, my point is that the state is made up of some Christians so on an individual level the state is influenced by Christians, and so my views are as valid as yours as part of the state.

US supported the discrimination of homosexuals, for whatever reason, then the majority would rule.

But if the majority of citizens supported same-sex then the state would be discriminating against Christians. My point is whats your point in this.

all of it. How do you define hate? I don’t hate anyone, I am however against some sexual practices, but although I am against prostitution, I don’t hate prostitutes, I am against adultery, but I don’t hate adulterers, I am against paedophilia, but do you think that is inciting hate against paeophiles? I don’t hate them and I don’t think so.

In the context of our discussion, 'inciting hatred against A' is promoting prejudice against A.

So what in our discussion is hatred? I don’t see any. But assuming that’s the case why do you think you can be prejudiced aganst me but I shouldn’t be prejudiced against you? That’s prejudice isnt it.

You misunderstand. Testimony is insufficient because subjective evidence cannot be externally verified. However, subjective evidence can be used internally, that is, divine communiqué can be used as supporting evidence of said divine's existance. Unfortunately, by the nature of subjective evidence, this is useless when trying to convince other of one's experiences. To that end, I have never tried to convince someone of my religious beliefs.

Firstly, what do you mean by subjective evidence and divine communiqué? You can see the lives of those who claim to have been changed so you can observe the evidence of their claim if you wish whether you call it divine or subjective. One can still reasonably doubt but you can see the external evidence.
In the case of Jesus Christ, one can also observe the change in people by the way the live their lives, which is external evidence, however many people saw the evidence of Jesus Christ in the flesh and believed He is God.

I also question whether you have 'seen' Jesus to the same scrutiny that you would have me see my gods.

As I said how do you know your God’s exist. I assume they have impacted your life and the external evidence would be your lifestyle, but has anyone seen them? I mean I have a divine communiqué in the form of the Holy Spirit, but the promise of that was heard and witnessed by people.

At the moment you seem to be trying to justify things with logic you dont even apply to yourself.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

ok so you seem bothered because God’s word in the Bible is anti-same-sex sex.

It is an infraction of the CF rules to misquote. Do not do it again.

No its my point. if some homosexuals are Christians and believe same-sex sex is wrong your claims to equal rights for homosexuals are false. That’s why I am happy to assume gay means practicing homosexuals as opposed to all homosexuals.

On the contrary, I have repeatedly defined 'homosexual' as 'sexual and/or romantic attraction to one's own sex'. Indeed, even under your definition, I don't see how '[my] claims to equal rights for homosexuals are false'.

Ah no not for Christians, we don’t define people by their sexual desires, but by desires to follow Jesus in all matters sexual and everything else.

Then you should not differentiate between those who are straight and those who are gay. If all Christians only differentiate between Christians and non-Christians, then surely there wouldn't be this fuss over homosexuality? Jesus never mentioned it, after all.

Sorry how does that work then?? Yes I agree that separation of church and state stops any religious organisation influencing the state as a religious organisation, but that’s not my point, my point is that the state is made up of some Christians so on an individual level the state is influenced by Christians, and so my views are as valid as yours as part of the state.

Read the rest of my post.

But if the majority of citizens supported same-sex then the state would be discriminating against Christians. My point is whats your point in this.

How would Christians be discriminated against?

So what in our discussion is hatred? I don’t see any. But assuming that’s the case why do you think you can be prejudiced aganst me but I shouldn’t be prejudiced against you? That’s prejudice isnt it.

We introduced the topic of hate a few posts back:

You: So how do you feel about Islam’s attitude to homosexuality and treatment of homosexuals?
Me: I am opposed to any and all forms of inciting hate.
You: Ah inciting hate. How do you define inciting hate?
Me: I'm not sure how to make it any simpler. Which part do you not understand?
You: all of it. How do you define hate? I don’t hate anyone, I am however against some sexual practices, but although I am against prostitution, I don’t hate prostitutes, I am against adultery, but I don’t hate adulterers, I am against paedophilia, but do you think that is inciting hate against paeophiles? I don’t hate them and I don’t think so.
Me: In the context of our discussion, 'inciting hatred against A' is promoting prejudice against A.

That is the context of our discussion. Hate has other meanings, as in 'love-hate relationship', but that meaning is not part of our discussion, and is not the meaning I used when I introduced the topic of hate.

Question: where have I been prejudiced to you?

Firstly, what do you mean by subjective evidence and divine communiqué?

Subjective evidence is any evidence that cannot be externally verified.
Divine communiqué is just that: communiqué from the/a divinity.

In the case of Jesus Christ, one can also observe the change in people by the way the live their lives, which is external evidence, however many people saw the evidence of Jesus Christ in the flesh and believed He is God.

You claim that people have claimed to have seen Jesus in the flesh (both before and after his crucifixtion). Jesus is only mentioned in the New Testament, and that itself was written at least 30 years after his alleged death. There is no objectively verifiably evidence for his existance, and certainly not for his resurrection.
That said, it is undeniable that people's lives 'change' (insofar as such a nebulous concept can be measured) after their conversion to Christianity. Is this evidence of Jesus' existance and his active role in the lives of his believers? No. This 'change' occurs across the board, no matter the direction of conversion (buddhist to hindu, christian to atheist, sikh to muslim, etc).

As I said how do you know your God’s exist.

I do not. I believe they exist, as you believe yours exist. There are very few things a entity actually knows without making assumptions.

I assume they have impacted your life and the external evidence would be your lifestyle,

That is not external evidence of their existance. It is evidence that my faith has impacted my life, yes, but not of my faith itself.

but has anyone seen them?

Has anyone seen yours?

I mean I have a divine communiqué in the form of the Holy Spirit, but the promise of that was heard and witnessed by people.

Allegedly. Has anyone seen your gods?

At the moment you seem to be trying to justify things with logic you dont even apply to yourself.

Justification?

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Wiccan_Child,

It is an infraction of the CF rules to misquote. Do not do it again.

I wasn’t quoting you it is my opinion that you seem bothered because God’s word in the Bible is anti-same-sex sex.

On the contrary, I have repeatedly defined 'homosexual' as 'sexual and/or romantic attraction to one's own sex'. Indeed, even under your definition, I don't see how '[my] claims to equal rights for homosexuals are false'.

I am not disputing your definition, I agree with it, I am disputing why you claimed equal rights for homosexuals when not all homosexuals have the same beliefs and want the same rights.


Quote:
Originally Posted by brightmorningstar
Ah no not for Christians, we don’t define people by their sexual desires, but by desires to follow Jesus in all matters sexual and everything else.

Then you should not differentiate between those who are straight and those who are gay.

I don’t, I am telling you as Christians we don’t do that.

If all Christians only differentiate between Christians and non-Christians, then surely there wouldn't be this fuss over homosexuality?

Depends who you are referring to as Christian and non-Christian.

Indeed, Jesus never mentioned it and its against what He did mention.

Read the rest of my post.

I did that’s why I asked how what you said can possibly be the case. I am referring to Christians as citizens in the state, not Christians as Christians I the church, you are confusing the two perhaps.

How would Christians be discriminated against?

I don’t know you tell me you are the one talking about discrimination. How could homosexuals be discriminated against when some of them as Christians aren’t discriminated against?

We introduced the topic of hate a few posts back:

I didn’t introduce it but I am still asking you what you see as inciting hate. .
Can you address my question then.
I am against paedophilia, but do you think that is inciting hate against paeophiles? I don’t hate them and I don’t think so. Yes or no?

 

[brightmorningstar]

Dear Wiccan_Child,

You claim that people have claimed to have seen Jesus in the flesh (both before and after his crucifixtion).

No. I believe peoples claim that they have seen Jesus in the flesh, I don’t claim their claim I believe it.

Jesus is only mentioned in the New Testament, and that itself was written at least 30 years after his alleged death. There is no objectively verifiably evidence for his existance, and certainly not for his resurrection.

Yes there is the testimony of those who saw Him and touched Him, otherwise there is no objectively verifiable evidence for Julius Ceasar or anyone in ancient history.

I do not. I believe they exist, as you believe yours exist. There are very few things a entity actually knows without making assumptions.

Ah but I have divine communiqué and subjective evidence for Jesus Christ as God in the flesh, you only have divine communiqué.

Has anyone seen yours?

??? Er yes I have just told you.

Allegedly. Has anyone seen your gods?

my God you mean. er yes they have seen God in the flesh in the form of Jesus Christ but I have told you that, I am asking you whether anyone has seen your gods.

 

[DMagoh]

What is the Wiccan position on same-sex sex?

Sex is to be rejoyced, whatever it's form (bearing in mind Wiccan morality: harm none).

That's interesting. I have heard several liberal Christians post that is their position on sex too. Wiccan Pagans and liberal Christians with the same positions on sex. Interesting.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I wasn’t quoting you it is my opinion that you seem bothered because God’s word in the Bible is anti-same-sex sex.[/quote]
No.

You: if you don’t believe the Bible is true why would you be bothered about what it says.
Me: I have answered this many times, in this and other threads, to you and other members.
You: ok so you seem bothered because God’s word in the Bible is anti-same-sex sex.

You misquoted me since all my previous posts concerning the Bible and homosexuality have expressed the diametric opposite to what you claim here.

I am not disputing your definition, I agree with it, I am disputing why you claimed equal rights for homosexuals when not all homosexuals have the same beliefs and want the same rights.

Just because they do not want the rights, does not mean I will not advocate them.

I don’t, I am telling you as Christians we don’t do that.

On the contrary, the majority of the anti-gay movement is Christian. Thus, some Christians differentiate between straight people and gay people. Your claim is demonstrateably false.

Depends who you are referring to as Christian and non-Christian.

On the contrary, the definition is up to you. This is your claim, not mine. I am simply going along with it.

I don’t know you tell me you are the one talking about discrimination.

On the contrary, you are the one who said that Christians would be discriminated against if the US unanimously supported equal rights for homosexuals.

How could homosexuals be discriminated against when some of them as Christians aren’t discriminated against?

Are you seriously denying that homosexuals are not discriminated against?

I didn’t introduce it but I am still asking you what you see as inciting hate.

I have already addressed this.

Can you address my question then.
I am against paedophilia, but do you think that is inciting hate against paeophiles? I don’t hate them and I don’t think so. Yes or no?

I do not understand the claim 'I am against paedophilia', so I cannot answer your question.

No. I believe peoples claim that they have seen Jesus in the flesh, I don’t claim their claim I believe it.

You said: "...many people saw the evidence of Jesus Christ in the flesh and believed He is God." This is the claim you made to which I was referring.

Yes there is the testimony of those who saw Him and touched Him,

That is not objectively verifiable evidence. That is, the alleged* testimony is not independantly verifiable, and is not evidence in and of itself. Of course, if objective evidence was presented, then the testimony could be used as support.

*For I have yet to see any such testimony.

otherwise there is no objectively verifiable evidence for Julius Ceasar or anyone in ancient history.

On the contrary, there is objective evidence for Julius Caesar. Bear in mind that not all figures in ancient history are known to exist.

Ah but I have divine communiqué and subjective evidence for Jesus Christ as God in the flesh, you only have divine communiqué.

You misunderstand. Divine communiqué is subjective evidence.

??? Er yes I have just told you.

Can you verify that anyone has seen your gods?

my God you mean. er yes they have seen God in the flesh in the form of Jesus Christ but I have told you that, I am asking you whether anyone has seen your gods.

As far as I know, my gods have not manifested as humans, though it there is a rite in which the Goddess enters the body of the High Priestess of a Coven. So yes, I would say they have been seen.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

That's interesting. I have heard several liberal Christians post that is their position on sex too. Wiccan Pagans and liberal Christians with the same positions on sex. Interesting.

I wondered when you would show up.
Maybe it'se becase both Wiccans and liberal Christians are, by definition, liberal?

 

[Zaac]

I agree that its not clear that David's and Jonathan's relationsihp was homosexual. Nor is it clear that it wasn't.
What is clear to me is that David was a man after God's heart and his sexual live (which God only called him on his adultery) would keep him from testifing in almost every church in the land if he was to walk into our midst today. That says to me that we have a differnt way of looking at things than God does.

Not so. David had to pay the penalty for his adultery in the same way as the church is to hold folks responsible today for that sin.

He had to be restored to the body just as would be the case today

 

[GwynApNudd]

Dear Wiccan_Child,

ok so you seem bothered because God’s word in the Bible is anti-same-sex sex.

You just don't seem to get it. As a non-Christian, Wiccan_Child could not care less what the Bible has to say about homosexuality or about anything else.

His complaint is about Christians who get up in his face quoting the Bible because they hear that he is gay, and about Christian activists who campaign for laws that violate his, and other gays' rights as human beings, and who quote the Bible as justification.

Activists who promote laws that would deny fair housing; laws that would allow harrassment in the workplace, and even allow a person to be fired for no other reason but that he is gay; laws that give a whole range of recognition, legal and monetary benefits, and assure reciprical responsibilities to any two people who register with the government as a family, unless those two people happen to be the same sex.

He is more than willing to allow us to believe in the Christian God and in His teachings in the Bible, as long as we treat him with respect, and don't trample on his rights.