Did student know this was a Gay Cake?

[Deafsilence]

translations are based on evidence and there is none to support that translation.

We have it in Greek. Don't need a translation. Go to the Textus Receptus, the word means the same - a Sodomite (aka Homosexual).

 

[Deafsilence]

I'm neither homosexual nor a Christian, so as noted before, I don't personally have a dog in the fight.

However, consistency in "the following of rules" can be a difference maker in terms of perceptions...especially if one aims to proselytize their views.

There's a reason why there's a very different reaction to the Amish vs. Southern Baptists. While both have similar rules surrounding many of these topics, one group is likely to be more consistent in following all the rules (instead of the ones that are easy) and are less "in your face" about it.

I'm a non denominational universalist that believes everyone will be saved in due time. As for the following of rules, what Homosexuals are trying to do is force rules upon Christians. They want to reach into our Faith and make it so that we cannot even teach our members that Homosexuality is a sin. They want to tell others that our writings don't rebuke sin (when that blatantly do). They want to make it so that we cannot gather and discuss this topic anywhere including churches. They want to make it a CRIME to say that homosexuality is a sin. So you want to tell us about rules? The rules are being put in place to remove the Truth from being preached to shut the mouths of Christians and to only allow what is pro carnal indulgence. In other words anything that is contrary to secularism they want to meet with hate and persecution. They will prevail because GOD is going to let them especially as we are in the last half of the Last Jubilee cycle.

 

[essentialsaltes]

what Homosexuals are trying to do is force rules upon Christians. They want to reach into our Faith and make it so that we cannot even teach our members that Homosexuality is a sin.

Where do you see anyone doing this with force, as opposed to persuasion? In the US.

They want to tell others that our writings don't rebuke sin (when that blatantly do).

Free speech and persuasion. Nobody's stopping you from rebutting their arguments with your own.

They want to make it so that we cannot gather and discuss this topic anywhere including churches.

Who's doing such a thing? From what I can see, some churches seem to have nothing else to talk about.

They want to make it a CRIME to say that homosexuality is a sin.

Who's doing such a thing?

The rules are being put in place to remove the Truth from being preached to shut the mouths of Christians and to only allow what is pro carnal indulgence.

Who's doing such a thing?

I know a lot of books are being banned nowadays, but it is not the gays banning Christian messages.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I'm a non denominational universalist that believes everyone will be saved in due time. As for the following of rules, what Homosexuals are trying to do is force rules upon Christians. They want to reach into our Faith and make it so that we cannot even teach our members that Homosexuality is a sin.

But that's not what is occurring in either the example from the OP, or in the example the other user posted about being upset about the Episcopalian church putting up a rainbow flag.

It was the evangelical side of the equation that's trying to force their rules upon others.

For instance, a girl wore a rainbow sweater and had a rainbow cake at her own birthday party at an Outback Steakhouse, her mom posted a video of her blowing out the candles to her own Facebook feed, and a school official saw it, and opted to try to force her to into some sort of conversion therapy, and then subsequently expelled her.

Not sure about you, but if a Christian school is basically spying on students and their families to see what they're doing off-campus (via scrolling through family members' social media feeds), and then trying to punish them and make them a social pariah for what they deem as "lifestyle violations", it's hard to see the school as the entity being the victim of coercion here.



With regards to people from other denominations basically trying to shame other denominations for not having the same priorities, that's another instance of them trying to impose their code onto everyone else.

For instance, Seventh Day Adventists believe in abstaining from consuming meat (or some cases, just certain types of meat) based on their interpretation of their scripture. Would a Seventh Day Adventist be justified in trying to imply to other denominations "you're not a real Christian unless you follow a vegetarian diet like we do!" or trying to attack other churches for sticking a pig roast sign up on the property with the implication that they're succumbing to "worldly desires", thereby implying that they're somehow a "lesser church"?

 

[Deafsilence]

Where do you see anyone doing this with force, as opposed to persuasion? In the US.


Free speech and persuasion. Nobody's stopping you from rebutting their arguments with your own.


Who's doing such a thing? From what I can see, some churches seem to have nothing else to talk about.



Who's doing such a thing?

Who's doing such a thing?

I know a lot of books are being banned nowadays, but it is not the gays banning Christian messages.

The Force is coming. WEF and the UN are starting that process to take actions.

OHCHR | Call for input to a thematic report: freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) and sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI)

The Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity (IE SOGI), Mr. Victor Madrigal-Borloz, will dedicate his report to the 53rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council to an exploration of the right to freedom of...

www.ohchr.org

 

[Deafsilence]

But that's not what is occurring in either the example from the OP, or in the example the other user posted about being upset about the Episcopalian church putting up a rainbow flag.

It was the evangelical side of the equation that's trying to force their rules upon others.

For instance, a girl wore a rainbow sweater and had a rainbow cake at her own birthday party at an Outback Steakhouse, her mom posted a video of her blowing out the candles to her own Facebook feed, and a school official saw it, and opted to try to force her to into some sort of conversion therapy, and then subsequently expelled her.

Not sure about you, but if a Christian school is basically spying on students and their families to see what they're doing off-campus (via scrolling through family members' social media feeds), and then trying to punish them and make them a social pariah for what they deem as "lifestyle violations", it's hard to see the school as the entity being the victim of coercion here.



With regards to people from other denominations basically trying to shame other denominations for not having the same priorities, that's another instance of them trying to impose their code onto everyone else.

For instance, Seventh Day Adventists believe in abstaining from consuming meat (or some cases, just certain types of meat) based on their interpretation of their scripture. Would a Seventh Day Adventist be justified in trying to imply to other denominations "you're not a real Christian unless you follow a vegetarian diet like we do!" or trying to attack other churches for sticking a pig roast sign up on the property with the implication that they're succumbing to "worldly desires", thereby implying that they're somehow a "lesser church"?
View attachment 327644

OHCHR | Call for input to a thematic report: freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) and sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI)

The Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity (IE SOGI), Mr. Victor Madrigal-Borloz, will dedicate his report to the 53rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council to an exploration of the right to freedom of...

www.ohchr.org

 

[essentialsaltes]

The Force is coming. WEF and the UN are starting that process to take actions.

So instead of homosexuals forcing churches to do something, we have the UN preparing a report. Possibly you have exaggerated the dangers.

 

[Deafsilence]

So instead of homosexuals forcing churches to do something, we have the UN preparing a report. Possibly you have exaggerated the dangers.

No, this is the groundwork for an enforcement of the provisions. They already make their clarifications in the document. This is a springboard to legislation to prevent discrimination against LGBT+ communities with regard to religious communities and religious circles. This means they will define Discrimination as what we have discussed here such as Homosexuality being a sin. If they get their way we will not be able to preach (without threat of a lawsuit or worse) that the Bible teaches that Homosexuality is a sin (when it clearly does). Any claims at such a time will be considered discrimination.

 

[essentialsaltes]

No, this is the groundwork for an enforcement of the provisions.

Keep us posted if anything happens.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

And we all know that homosexuality is the only sin.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

Keep us posted if anything happens.

There already building the camps.

 

[Deafsilence]

Keep us posted if anything happens.

Will do.

 

[Deafsilence]

And we all know that homosexuality is the only sin.

No there is more. For example, hating Christians would be a sin.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

No there is more. For example, hating Christians would be a sin.

And falsely accusing.

 

[Deafsilence]

And falsely accusing.

Yes, I would suppose falsely accusing Christians would be a sin also.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

Yes, I would suppose falsely accusing Christians would be a sin also.

So what did a non Christian do to you to have such feelings or is it the fact that they exist?

Never mind, I think I found the answer. I shall refrain from defiling your thread.

 

[Deafsilence]

So what did a non Christian do to you to have such feelings or is it the fact that they exist?

Never mind, I think I found the answer. I shall refrain from defiling your thread.

I have no problem with non-Christians. An Atheist is an atheist because God planned it that way.

 

[Pommer]

No, this is the groundwork for an enforcement of the provisions. They already make their clarifications in the document. This is a springboard to legislation to prevent discrimination against LGBT+ communities with regard to religious communities and religious circles. This means they will define Discrimination as what we have discussed here such as Homosexuality being a sin. If they get their way we will not be able to preach (without threat of a lawsuit or worse) that the Bible teaches that Homosexuality is a sin (when it clearly does). Any claims at such a time will be considered discrimination.

Aren’t Christians’ opinions supposed to be “persecuted”?
The disciples were told of this eventuality but now Christians want to complain when the folks who’ve been oppressed by the church for two millennia begin to push for their own rights as human beings?

 

[Pommer]

I have no problem with non-Christians. An Atheist is an atheist because God planned it that way.

We’re nothing more than meat-based automatons?
(Don’t get me wrong, there is much to like about such a view!)

 

[Aryeh Jay]

I have no problem with non-Christians. An Atheist is an atheist because God planned it that way.

If that is the case, then I wish God just want ahead and did it back in the 1970s instead of the way he chose.