Originally posted by twhitehead Whatever the philosophy behind it, the no-condom message preached by the Catholic Church and other Christians is directly responsible for a large proportion of the AIDS epidemic. This is undeniable fact.
If they listen to the teaching of "no condoms" by the Catholic church, why do they then ignore the "no sex outside of marriage" teaching that goes along with it? It seems to me that it is silly to hold to one teaching, but then ignore the other teachings. Why bother listening to the church at all if that is their position. Both teachings go hand in hand. If everyone abstained from sex that is outside of marriage, there would be no AIDS epidemic. Ignoring the church and its teachings are what is driving the AIDS epidemic. If you are going to ignore the "no sex outside of marriage" teaching, then by all means ignore the condom ban as well.
Originally posted by whodey If they listen to the teaching of "no condoms" by the Catholic church, why do they then ignore the "no sex outside of marriage" teaching that goes along with it? It seems to me that it is silly to hold to one teaching, but then ignore the other teachings. Why bother listening to the church at all if that is their position. Both teachings go hand in hand. ...[text shortened]... he "no sex outside of marriage" teaching, then by all means ignore the condom ban as well.
I know that many Christians view the Da Vinci code as a bad movie. My pastor spoke about the movie last Sunday. He pointed out the many "untruths" in the book and the fact that the author says that the book is fiction and in no way was intended to depict reality. He said that the trouble is that many do not know history of the church that well or Biblical teachings and theology. Their are many that think what they see at the movies or on TV, if presented realistically enough, will be interpreted by many to be reality.
Just as a side note, is it just me, or is it funny that "the devil movie" is being directed by Ron Howard who is otherwise affectionatly known as Opey? Also, the leading character, Tom Hanks, is also beloved by movie goers and is incapable of playing any type of villanous character whatsoever. LOL
Originally posted by kirksey957 It's the people who do believe in Him making up childish things that should concern us.
The fact that James Kennedy thinks this is even an important issue while genocide in Darfur takes place causes one to ponder the sorry state of misplaced priorities of certain segments of the church.
I hear ya brother. I will tell you why no one care about our brothers in Chirst in Darfur. It is because they are poor, they are African and black as the snow is white, and worst of all........they are CHRISTIANS!!!!!! They are indeed worst of the worst. We must be politically correct, however, and not talk badly about the Muslims who are carrying out this genocidal insanity. We must be culturally sensitive to the followers of Muhammad as we belittle their Christian counterparts.
I do, however, defend the right of ministers such as James Kennedy for standing up for what they believe in. Many think that anyone and everyone should be involved in politics except for those who are religious. Thats just hypocritical and wrong. We all have beliefs that whether we are an atheist or a Christian or a Hindu. Whe has the right to say which belief should take precedants over another? I for one defend my beliefs such as opposing abortion ect based on what I know to be right. I could be wrong but I do not think any one endorses a theocracy. This is what our founding fathers gaurded against. To be a Christian means to stand up for what you know to be right and be a light in the world by proclaiming the good news and shunning the culture of death.
Originally posted by Nicksten I think this is a very interresting e-mail that I have received this morning and is only actually intended for Christians, but if you are not one, then still read it.
DR. JAMES KENNEDY AND OTHER AUTHORITIES WANT ALL CHRISTIANS TO KNOW THE TRUTH. I THOUGHT YOU ...[text shortened]... nd let's expose this lie for what it is because the hour is late and much later than we think.
what a piece of christian propanga...so the davinci code is wrong, tell us something we don't know, but just because its wrong doesn't mean that chrisianity is correct...what a load of crappy rhetoric!!!!!!!!!!!11
Originally posted by Halitose [b
As for your second statement, I'm intrigued -- why would a person disregard the church's teaching on abstinence and mutual faithfulness in marriage and then implicitly follow the teaching to disuse condoms?[/b]
Human nature. Biblical morality is in large part designed to block or control human nature - a losing battle in most instances.
Abstinence is against human nature. It is far easier to follow the condom "law" than the one preventing sex entirely.
This is related to an argument that exists in U.S. schools concerning condom instruction and availability. It is assumed that including such instruction in sexual education will only encourage sex, so we should focus exclusively on abstinence.
Unfortunately one of these options is viable as an alternative to child pregnancy and STD risks, while the other is horribly ignorant of basic human psychology and biology.
Originally posted by Nicksten I think this is a very interresting e-mail that I have received this morning and is only actually intended for Christians, but if you are not one, then still read it.
DR. JAMES KENNEDY AND OTHER AUTHORITIES WANT ALL CHRISTIANS TO KNOW THE TRUTH. I THOUGHT YOU ...[text shortened]... nd let's expose this lie for what it is because the hour is late and much later than we think.
Originally posted by Churlant Human nature. Biblical morality is in large part designed to block or control human nature - a losing battle in most instances.
Abstinence is against human nature. It is far easier to follow the condom "law" than the one preventing sex entirely.
This is related to an argument that exists in U.S. schools concerning condom instruction and availability. ...[text shortened]... STD risks, while the other is horribly ignorant of basic human psychology and biology.
-JC
Biblical morality is in large part designed to block or control human nature - a losing battle in most instances. Strongly disagree. The 'morality' the Bible speaks of is far beyond the do's and don't's of religion.
Originally posted by FreakyKBH [b]Biblical morality is in large part designed to block or control human nature - a losing battle in most instances. Strongly disagree. The 'morality' the Bible speaks of is far beyond the do's and don't's of religion.[/b]
like its moral to kill everybody that's living in a city that you want to destroy, because you want the land around it?
The short answer is that Dan Brown's version of the life of Christ is not in accordance with the Gospel accounts which are the basis for Christianity. So it follows that if the Gospel accounts can't be trusted, the foundation of Christianity is on shaky ground. But that sort of thing has been going on from the beginning. I like the story about Voltaire. He was confident that within a generation from his time, the only Bibles that would be left would be ones in museums. Some time after his death, his home came into use by the Geneva Bible Society.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Why should it make the slightest difference to Christians whether Christ was married (had sexual relations) or not? I'm genuinely curious.
The short answer is that Dan Brown's version of the life of Christ is not in accordance with the Gospel accounts which are the basis for Christianity. So it follows that if the Gospel accounts can't be trusted, the foundation of Christianity is on shaky ground. But that sort of thing has been going on from the beginning. I like the story about Voltaire. He was confident that within a generation from his time, the only Bibles that would be left would be ones in museums. Some time after his death, his home came into use by the Geneva Bible Society.
The Da Vinci Code Lie Exposed
20 May '06 16:562 edits
Back to Top