Originally posted by josephw At that time and place it was. How could it be otherwise?
How could it be otherwise???
Do you lack the imagination to entertain the possibility that it might never be morally permissible to kill people on account of their simply voluntarily engaging in consensual homosexual sex?
Originally posted by josephw The road to Damascus? Saul of Tarsus? The revelation of the mystery?
You've read Acts?
I went back and read that portion of Acts again. Christ identified himself to Saul and then sent him to Damascus. He did not sit him down and discuss the Old Testament with him and how he fulfilled various prophesies, nor discuss really anything else. He sent him to someone else to be taught, and he was rather fervent in his subsequent proclamations, but it never says that he was accurate or that "It's Paul that fully explains Christ. And the work of the cross." I don't remember any indication that the Apostles ever warmed up to him or confirmed anything he taught, but I could be mistaken.
Originally posted by pawnhandler I went back and read that portion of Acts again. Christ identified himself to Saul and then sent him to Damascus. He did not sit him down and discuss the Old Testament with him and how he fulfilled various prophesies, nor discuss really anything else. He sent him to someone else to be taught, and he was rather fervent in his subsequent proclamations, ...[text shortened]... the Apostles ever warmed up to him or confirmed anything he taught, but I could be mistaken.
One of the interesting things about Paul's conversion and subsequent ministry that we never hear about is that most likelly several years elapsed between his conversion and his going out on the "lecture circuit." Why is this interesting? I think it is interesting that even inspite of his passion and dramatic conversion, he was gaining some perpective. It seems that this time of perspective could be a healthy thing. Just my opinion.
Originally posted by josephw Homosexuality is an abomination. And you are an intolerant hypocrite.
Unlike you I am able to make a distinction between the individual and the behavior.
How is he an intolerant hypocrit? If, as you say, it is an "abomination", then it seems one really doesn't need to distinguish between the indiviual and the behavior.
Originally posted by pawnhandler I went back and read that portion of Acts again. Christ identified himself to Saul and then sent him to Damascus. He did not sit him down and discuss the Old Testament with him and how he fulfilled various prophesies, nor discuss really anything else. He sent him to someone else to be taught, and he was rather fervent in his subsequent proclamations, ...[text shortened]... the Apostles ever warmed up to him or confirmed anything he taught, but I could be mistaken.
I say this kindly. You are mistaken. If you will make a careful study of Galatians you will discover why. It takes about 10 minutes to read the whole book.
I'm sorry if I don't explain things in more detail, but I can't just sit here and type all day. I like to keep things simple. I hope you don't mind.
Originally posted by josephw I say this kindly. You are mistaken. If you will make a careful study of Galatians you will discover why. It takes about 10 minutes to read the whole book.
I'm sorry if I don't explain things in more detail, but I can't just sit here and type all day. I like to keep things simple. I hope you don't mind.
Originally posted by josephw I say this kindly. You are mistaken. If you will make a careful study of Galatians you will discover why. It takes about 10 minutes to read the whole book.
I'm sorry if I don't explain things in more detail, but I can't just sit here and type all day. I like to keep things simple. I hope you don't mind.
You have a terrible attitude. Do you realize what the Apostle Paul would give to have such easy access to literally hundreds of thousands of people all over the world by typing in these forums? Here you are worrying about typing all night when he was beaten, imprisoned, shipwrecked, and had his head cut off.
Originally posted by kirksey957 One of the interesting things about Paul's conversion and subsequent ministry that we never hear about is that most likelly several years elapsed between his conversion and his going out on the "lecture circuit." Why is this interesting? I think it is interesting that even inspite of his passion and dramatic conversion, he was gaining some perpective. It seems that this time of perspective could be a healthy thing. Just my opinion.
A healthy thing you think? I won't argue that introspection isn't a healthy thing to do, but Paul was given a "thorn in the flesh", that is, he was given a messenger of Satan to buffet him, because of the revelation he had received. To keep him humble.
Originally posted by josephw A healthy thing you think? I won't argue that introspection isn't a healthy thing to do, but Paul was given a "thorn in the flesh", that is, he was given a messenger of Satan to buffet him, because of the revelation he had received. To keep him humble.
Do you have any ideas about what that "thorn in the flesh" might have been?
Good night you guys. I have to get up too early in the morning. I was up too late last night doing this.
I'll try to get back here tomorrow night. But don't hold your breath. Besides, I can't win! 😞
Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter
29 May '07 10:001 edit
Back to Top