David #fundie premier.org.uk

Gayism is the promotion of gay politics and lifestyle, whether its at home or in the office.

No, there is no straightism, because there is no "straight". There is only a normal sexual default, whereas Gayism is the promotion of gay politics and lifestyle as popularly promoted on the internet as a social movement.

Sid Cordle & HoratioLordNelson #fundie premier.org.uk

Sid Cordle: The law should just ask if there was another printer who could do the banner? If so then what is the problem? There has to be reasonable accommodation for people who conscientously object to promoting homosexuality. I mean the law wouldn't force an Asian restaurant to serve pork when there's another restaurant down the road that does and they know full well Asian restaurants by and large think its wrong to eat pork. There has to be reasonable accommodation for the ethics of the business.

HoratioLordNelson: Ageed. He wasn't refusing to serve them because they were gay, which most would agree is wrong. He was refusing to promote a message with which he disagrees. Same as Ashers bakery, and even Peter Tatchel came out in their defence. They could have found another printer but no they had to viciously stick the knife in with a vindictive prosecution, persecuting those who refuse to endorse their agenda, those who demanded tolerance showing themselves incapable of tolerance themselves. The LGBT lobby never waste a chance to demonstrate the true vicious intolerant nature of their agenda, you reap what you sow, the tide will turn against them one day. When are they going to start going after muslim businesses in the same fashion? No, they only want the easy low hanging fruit offered by christians, and the courts have declared open season and rich pickings to be had.

I P Knightley #fundie premier.org.uk

dandbj13: Not sure why a person's conscience should free them from the law. I remember a time when people were openly hostile to serving black people as equals, and blatantly refused them service on the basis of conscience.
Then there were mixed-race marriages which many Christian states made illegal. The federal laws changed all that. But those states still have the racist laws on their books. Can't say I give a damn about their conscience.
Now the same thing is happening to people with SSA. There are laws, ancient laws on the books making their activities illegal despite the fact that the federal government has spoken clearly on the matter.
Individuals feel emboldened to act on their prejudices despite the law thinking their conscience is some kind of shield. It is not, nor has it ever been. So I really don't give a fig about a bigot's conscience.


dandbj13: You would benefit from a better understanding of biology. Let's say you come to understand that being gay is also biological. Would you then change your opinion? Or would you continue to say that it is okay to discriminate?

I P Knightley: Being homosexual is not biological any more than being an embezzler is.

dandbj13: You say that as if I didn't just drop this link:
Some people just need better information to make better decisions. Other people are just bigots, and will ignore better information to hang on to their bigotry.
At this point, you are just denying science to hang on to your bigotry. This happened with racists as well. Even after science told us there was no inferiority, racists just keep saying there was anyway.
You know science tells us that all sexual preference is biological. Yet you deny it, not because you have better science, but because you have stronger bigotry.


dandbj13: Never said biology was the only factor. But you should definitely revise your numbers, and do better research.
But the problem is the same for the Christian if it is biological to any degree. Tit is as biological as heterosexuality and left-handedness.
It is also not unnatural in any way. As I keep pointing out, it is present in other animals. They are not acting against nature. Neither are humans.
The real issue is you don't care about the science at all. You only care that your bible says it is an abomination. That is all that will ever matter to you. No science will ever trump that for you. In this way, you have removed yourself from rational discourse.

I P Knightley: When did you drop it? A few minutes ago? I don't have time to read it now, possibly ever

dandbj13: I dropped it yesterday. But your comment tells us everything we need to know about you. You will never have time to learn something that disrupts your preconceived bigotry. Good day.

I P Knightley: That's a very stupid lie.
If you had posted that link yesterday, I would have seen it and read it, which I have done now.
It's entirely fact free, just assertion.

dandbj13 : From the article you call fact free:
"These findings are part of a report released by the Academy of Science South Africa, the outcome of work conducted by a panel put together in 2014 to evaluate all research on the subject of sexual orientation done over the last 50 years. It did this against the backdrop of a growing number of new laws in Africa that discriminate against people attracted to others of the same sex. The work was conducted in conjunction with the Ugandan Academy of Science."
Now all the scientific reports are fact free. But you think your bible has better reliable scientific facts? Show me something in the Bible that is more than a claim on the subject. I'll wait...

Chellebaby #fundie premier.org.uk

SteveWB: Isn’t it shocking, David, for Christians to be called the ‘love brigade’!!

Chellebaby: Correction it is NOT Christians that are being called the love brigade. It is indeed the fake Christians with their fake love everyone gospel. What makes the gospel even more ludicrous is the fact that those of you on here who claim that false gospel FAIL regularly to show LOVE to any of your enemies. It would be laughable if it wasn't so dangerous and leading people to Hell.

Mark Jones #fundie premier.org.uk

Oh I do care about how others suffer. That’s why I speak the truth. See unlike you, I actually care about seeing people come to know Jesus Christ. I don’t care whether the truth isn’t “nice”, I care that it brings people into a relationship with Jesus.

You on the other hand only care about yourself and your ego. You care about popularity. So much so that you will willing cost someone an eternity with God to stroke your own ego. But deep down you already know this, and it probably makes you sick to your stomach.

I do pray for you Colin, as you need Jesus in your life. But until your heart is softened you’ll never know Him.

Deep down you know the words you speak are lies. That is why when offered the chance to show the validity of your words you can’t do it.

Chelleberry #fundie premier.org.uk

Correction it is NOT Christians that are being called the love brigade. It is indeed the fake Christians with their fake love everyone gospel. What makes the gospel even more ludicrous is the fact that those of you on here who claim that false gospel FAIL regularly to show LOVE to any of your enemies. It would be laughable if it wasn't so dangerous and leading people to Hell.

Make sure and get it right the next time Steve.

I P Knightley #fundie premier.org.uk

Rev. William H. Carey: I have almost 40 years experience researching scripture in the original languages. Chris is correct both in his understanding of David and Jonathan's relationship, and the relationship of the centurion and his boy. Jonathan and David were married. It was David's first marriage, but not Jonathan's. When David later married Jonathan's sister, Saul recognized it as David's second marriage to one of his children. This is clearly shown in the Hebrew text. English versions twist the translation to hide it, but don't all do so in the same way. Some, like KJV, add words, while others change the meanings of words. The evidence that they were married is irrefutable from the Hebrew text.
The relationship between the centurion and his pais is also pretty clear. Such relationships were pretty much ubiquitous among Roman men. It was considered normal, and a normal part of the boy's education. It should be mentioned that the boys in these relationships were not children. They were adolescents, and some sources indicate that a boy didn't enter such a relationship until he reached his full height, which would put him mid to late teens.
The evidence for all of this, should you care enough about the truth to verify it, is found on this website: hoperemainsonline.com If you have questions about the material on the site, they have a staff who will respond.

I P Knightley: Your evidence for the above screed is?

Rev. William H. Carey: You're joking, right? I gave you a link for the evidence. Or did you expect me to reproduce the entire Hebrew and Greek text here? Come on, get real.

I P Knightley: Did you really expect me to read a pro-homosexual site?
Why would you expect that?


I P Knightley: So far I have seen you guys compare your habits with being: black, diabetic, autistic, red-headed and left-handed. What next?

Rev. William H. Carey: Nothing wrong with being compared to those things. They are all genetic traits. On the other hand, how do you feel about being classed in with the KKK, Westboro Baptist and other hate groups? Those aren't genetic traits. They are examples of bigotry fueled by willful ignorance.

I P Knightley: "They are all genetic traits"False! " On the other hand, how do you feel about being classed in with the KKK, Westboro Baptist" I am not an American so grow up!

Reverend William H. Carey: Your nationality is irrelevant. You still fit right in with those groups, both of which are listed as hate groups.

I P Knightley: That is utter insulting NONSENSE!
I thankfully know almost nothing about the KKK, it's an American invention, but I know that it's not Christian.
Westboro is one extended family, not a church.
I think that you will find that most actual Christians think as I do, making your masquerade pointless!


I P Knightley: No homosexual is filled with God's spirit
If any such person was, he could not continue to be homosexual.


I P Knightley: Oh I have given up on him! He is determined to twist whatever I say, as I know he does with you too. You are very patient with him!


Jeff: I decided to click on that link William provided. Trying to follow the explanation of their interpretations of Hebrew, and how they was explaining how to apply it was very trying, I felt like I would have to do a double take. Before I was willing to invest in that, I thought I would check out a simpler example of these writers credibility, so then I clicked on Adam and Eve vs Adam and Steve. Their logic did seem to show obvious evidence of being predisposed in their objective and was their motive in how they formed their logic and assumptions. They also seemed to decide when to use assumptions according to their logic and talked as if that was what made obvious sense, when it did not, in fact was in degrees of absurd.

I P Knightley: Thank you for that analysis!
I am not at all surprised, just sad. *Tear drop emoji*.

JohnBoy #fundie premier.org.uk

[In response to PeteJ asking "You think God supports removing very small children from their parents and putting them in cages? Come on stop being ridiculous"]

At least they don't stay in those cages for the rest of their childhood and teenage years, unlike what happens when they take them from where they should be and give them to a couple of homosexuals for adoption!

Baz #fundie premier.org.uk

The punishment meant was to turn them into sodomites a serious punishment and it clearly says what you say is gay is nothing of the such but according to the passage something filthy not to be celebrated in marriage but to be shunned besides their are many examples in the bible how this practice is an abomination Gomorrah was destroyed for the practice and the people their did not break any hospitality rules and it also says in other New Testament writings these people will not go into heaven so again I say bring them to repentance and deliver them from this wickedness not encourage them I might say no where in the bible does it call them gay

Baz #fundie premier.org.uk

God has called them sodomites Satan says no no no their light and gay like me Gods got it wrong those who serve Satan say yes their gay but that’s like a slap in Gods face how can those who serve God call anything He says is an abomination gay Satan can whose side are you on

Honey Crisis #fundie premier.org.uk

(=Bible scholar claims passage condemning homosexuals was rewritten=)

Note to said "Scholar"; No it wasn't rewritten, you just don't understand it.

Well, I guess if his goal was attention, he's getting that.

But his position is nonsense.

Deut 22:5, 23:1, Lev 18:22, etc were not rewritten.

And if they didn't say what they said, they would be wrong, and incoherent scripturally.

andHarry #fundie premier.org.uk

Peter: Read the moon landing conspiracists. Or 9:11. You'd be convinced. The big hole in their and your argument is the utterly risible and totally unconvincing alternative they and you offer. But let's park that for now.

andHarry: Look:) All these frauds and blunders have been widely acknowledged and documented elsewhere. Read what Stephen Jay Gould had to say about the conning of the scientific community for years and years by the Piltdown Man fiasco. Bergman provides extensive footnotes for his sources, etc. You are living a life in denial, Peter:)


Peter: Get real and think the earth is 4000 years old and every species from the poles to the tropics including dinosaurs found their way to a boat in the Middle East and survived there together? Right

andHarry: 6000 years, and a single undivided land mass - Pangea, if you like. Hence no problem with access to the Ark. According to Genesis 10:25 and 1 Chronicles 1:19, the Earth was divided in Peleg's time. Also all creatures still followed man. I would argue that when Noah sent our the most intelligent creature on the Ark to chart the receding water we have the first rebellion in the animal kingdom while the home-seeking dove remained obedient; analogous to the present desertion of the gospel by the 'wise and learned'. The raven and it's kindred kind, jays, magpies, etc. with their birdbrains out-think our supposed ape relatives. Interesting.

andHarry #fundie premier.org.uk

'Sorry, Harry. You quote ONE scientist and his study.'

I could quote many. There are plenty out there if you were interested in looking at both side of the question. I assume therefore that you are not familiar with Sanford's thesis.
That same sex acts are forbidden is not based on whether homosexuality is chosen or not, but that same sex acts represent a fall from the originally perfect state of the complementary union of a man and a woman, and that same sex practices are unhealthy. The answer is celibacy as it used to be for carriers of haemophilia; another of the many defects that flesh is heir to. The suggestion that they be blessed by a loving God of perfection is what brings me into the debate.

If I were restricted to one in-your-face topographical feature for my belief in, for instance, the Genesis Deluge account I would rest on the well-known but inexplicable fact, for some, that there are vast planation surfaces found at several levels, generally three; all over the Earth. If you google 'planation surfaces' you will get an explanation of how a planation surface is formed; an easily understandable explanation of the conditions necessary for the production of such a formation; but NOT three, or more, planed surfaces on escalating (or descending) levels. The surface of the earth can be planed by glaciation, but such action leaves behind features like lateral and terminal moraine, drumlins, etc. However, the surfaces which cause problems are those which have been 'planed', or eroded, by fast flowing rock-bearing water. Left behind, and strewn across the surface of this plain as testimony, are roundish rocks and boulders of varying sizes.
The account of a great universal Flood, or Deluge, which surged backwards and forwards across the face of the Earth, scouring the land, repeatedly eroding and depositing layers of sediment, and the jumbled remains of forests, plants and animals, is recorded in the hundreds upon hundreds of remarkably similar stories in diverse tribes; handed down from the survivors. This tumultuous flooding went on for days, weeks, months - an unimaginable scenario. Compared to this catastrophe the floods in the Tigris and elsewhere, leaving a bit of gunge, are mere splashes. The original, probably low-lying, equatorial land was completely submerged. The 'fountains of the deep' - great reservoirs of underground water, surged up, with cataclysmic earthquakes belching forth lava to produce the huge sheets of basalt which cover great expanses without break all over the Earth. At some stage the earth began to be pushed up in places out of the water. Such a push would be followed by great surges of rock-laden torrents which would evenly abrade some of the mountaintops and rocks at each new lowered sea-level, cutting, with equal ease, across both hard and soft layers; resulting in a planation surface. Since planation surfaces (or planed surfaces) are found throughout the world at roughly three levels, this would indicate more than three further massive upthrusts of the land, with concomitant abrasion, scouring and deposition, caused by the violently disturbed and surging waters. The scouring rocks, some of immense size, left scattered over these great planation surfaces bear witness to the catastrophe.
And again the most important question; do you have the indwelling Holy Spirit which will lead you into all truth?

Martin #fundie premier.org.uk

(=Note - This one legit got a chuckle out of me=)

The Bible has not been rewritten, edited or deleted, but it has been translated. Men wrote as God caused them to write over ~1500 years and the result is an inerrant consistent set of documents.

Martin #fundie premier.org.uk

(=A rant against a Progresisve Christian Website=)

That you are not a Christian is illustrated by this post.

From PATHetic thEOS

1. "We embrace the many variations of the view expressed by many great Christian thinkers that “We take the Bible too seriously, to read it all literally.”

Really, this sounds like an excuse to make up your own opinion as to what is good and bad rather than accept what the Bible says.

2. "We don’t think that God wrote the Bible. We think it was written by fallible human beings who were inspired by (not dictated to by) the Holy Spirit. Hence, we don’t consider it to be infallible or inerrant."

Then why bother with the Bible at all? After all, you are so much more clever than those who wrote it and know so much more. You even know more than Jesus who clearly did regard the Bible as infallible.

3. "While we’re aware of the many inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible; and while we’re abhorred by, and reject, the various instances of horrible theology that appear here and there within the texts (e.g., passages that posit God as wrathful, vindictive, and condoning of slavery, and even “ordering” rape and genocide, etc.), they don’t cause us to reject the Bible, rather, they endear us to the Bible. Not because we agree with those passages, but because we recognize that they are fully human – they’re authentic, they’re down to earth, and they flat out convey the desperate and very real frustration, lament, and anger that are part of the human condition. The fact that such passages were allowed to be written into our holy scriptures are evidence of a mature people who realize that it’s best not to hide our dirty laundry or to deny our very real human feelings and passions. If the Bible were all about PR propaganda, they would have edited out those passages. We view those passages as exceptions to the over-arching message of the Bible of promoting unconditional love and the full inclusion and acceptance of all of God’s children. Indeed, while we wish those passages weren’t there, they actually help us to grant authority to the Bible in that we can see that was written by fellow humans who are struggling with real life and death matters of injustice, oppression. And since they make space for our need to vent and rage – we honor the Bible all the more for it honors our shadow sides – and that honoring is what allows for the possibility of our shadows being transformed and integrated in healthy ways."

So in other words, as above, you take out the bits you like and reject those you don't like. You seem to think that all mankind is God's children, reading the Bible should have taught you that this is not so. Would you consider Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot God's children? And BTW there are no " inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible".

4. "We read the Bible prayerfully. We agree with our conservative brothers and sisters that the Holy Spirit helps us to interpret what we need to read as we read."

To read the Bible in this way you first have to be a Christian, you have to be willing to listen to God. Your previous points have demonstrated that this is not the case so you cannot claim to receive the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

5. "We seek to apply full attention to Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience (and that includes the insights of contemporary science)."

Remember, much of contemporary science is just the opinions of fallible men. It is not without reason that it is spoken of as the best current understanding, tomorrow it might be different. And when it becomes different, you will have to change your theology. What you really mean is that you place your opinion as the authority and accept anything in Scripture that matches up to that.

6. "We realize that there is no “objective, one, right way” to interpret a passage – and we recognize that there is no reading of any text – including the Bible – that doesn’t involve interpretation. We also realize that each person interprets the text via their own personal experiences, education, upbringing, socio-political context, and more."

In other words you can make the Bible mean whatever you want.


7. "We do our best to read the biblical texts in their original languages (Hebrew and koine Greek) – and consult scholars and others to assist us. We also tend to look at several English translations – and by no means limiting ourselves to the King James version – which, while the best English version in conveying the beautiful poetry of the original languages, is based upon inferior manuscripts."

That's pretty pointless when you are clearly manipulating the text to mean what you want it to mean. Indeed, why bother with the Bible at all?

8. "We consider the best available Biblical scholarship from those who study it academically and professionally (and they’re generally fellow Christians and/or Jews)."

And by best, it seems, you mean those who agree with you.

9. "We seek to read passages in context – within their chapter, within their book, within their genre, and within the over-arching thrust of the Bible."

Doesn't this conflict with your need to be the master, or is it that you manipulate the context to fit what you want it to mean.

10. "We seek to read the passages with consideration of the historical socio-political contexts, frequently of oppression, which they were written in."

This, of course, manipulates 9, above. What you mean is that you use all sorts of unproven ideas to modify what the text says so it suits you.

11. "We employ a hermeneutic of compassion, love, and justice. (Which Jesus utilized). A hermeneutic is “an interpretive lens” and intentional filter. The hermeneutic of love seeks to see the forest for the trees and that allows the spirit of the law to trump the letter of the law (which Jesus modeled[sic])."

And what hermeneutic was Jesus using when He said:

And then will I declare to them, I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.
(Matthew 7:23 [ESV])

And this is just a way of modifying the meaning to fit your prejudices.

12. "We also tend to employ a “canon within the canon” lens whereby we give greater weight and priority to certain texts over others. A canon is an officially established collection of books that are revered by a given community – for Protestants, that refers to the 66 books of the Bible. In my case, I give greatest weight to Mark, Luke, Matthew, John (in that order), certain letters that Paul actually wrote (as opposed to the Pastoral Epistles which he didn’t), the Prophets, and the Psalms. I interpret the other books of the Bible according to how they jibe and are in sync with these primary texts. Many progressive Christians refer to themselves as “Matthew 25 Christians” (referring to the test for who Jesus says is in or isn’t in the Kingdom by what they do or don’t do), “Sermon on the Mount Christians” (stressing their seeking to prioritize those teachings as central); or as “Red Letter Christians” (indicating that they give greatest weight to the words attributed to Jesus)."

So in other words, you place the books that say things you don't like low down on the list. What a dishonest way of reading the Bible.

13. "We also seek to allow “scripture to interpret scripture.” Here’s an example regarding how to interpret “the sin of Sodom”:
The Bible interprets itself regarding the story of Sodom in Ezekiel 16:49 “‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me. And Jesus himself supports the view that the sin of Sodom was their lack of hospitality and hesed (loving-kindness) in Matthew 10:9 “Do not get any gold or silver or copper to take with you in your belts— no bag for the journey or extra shirt or sandals or a staff, for the worker is worth his keep. Whatever town or village you enter, search there for some worthy person and stay at their house until you leave. As you enter the home, give it your greeting. If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet. Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.”

And the result of Sodom's sin was that they were sliding down that slippery slope we see in Romans 1:18-32.

14. "We follow Jesus’ example in being willing to reject certain passages & theologies in the Bible and to affirm other ones. (He did it a lot)"

Really, would you like to give us an example?

15. "We do as much of the above as we can with fellow Christians in community with others. We avoid doing it solely as a solo endeavor. (We also tend to be open to doing this in community with Jews and Muslims, as fellow “people of the Book” whose insights are often invaluable)"

So you don't seek the opinions of those who love God, but rather look for people who agree with you, even unbelievers.

16. "We repeat these steps frequently as new information and scholarship comes in. Knowing that we will always find something that we hadn’t noticed before each time that we do this."

And always ensuring that we look for those in agreement with us.

Ayoola Hamilton-Tikare #fundie premier.org.uk

Correction: God never threatens anyone with hell, he just warns us against ending up there by choice.

People go to hell because they choose a path that leads away from God's gracious and abundant provision of eternal life with him in his heavenly habitation; i.e., they make choices that separate them from God's life-giving presence.

Unfortunately, the only alternative eternal habitation for the human soul is hell, which was prepared for the devil and his angels as judgment and punishment for their rebellion against God and his rule. Whoever rejects God and his ways therefore ends up there instead.

That's why Jesus came to earth to proclaim God's Kingdom, pay the price of our deliberate acts of rebellion against God and offer us the gift of eternal life. The Bible serves as a record of all this so that we can all read it and make our own informed choices.

Shane Burgess #fundie premier.org.uk

Shane Burgess: No Sodom and Gomora was destroyed because of homosexuality when the men of the city want to rape the men Lot took into his house not realizing they were angels. Roman talk about men having sex with men and women having sex with women when God hand them over to a debased mind. In Paul ever wrote in 1 Corinthians 6 that homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God. But that doesn't mean that there wont be former homosexuals because Jesus delivered them. Because their is a demonic spirit behind it that is take the power of the Holy Spirit to drive off. The book of Revelations talk against sexual immorality and homosexuality fall in it. I see homosexuality as any other sin. God hates it, so paid the price so people can be set free from it if they just come to Him. He love them but hate the sin because it separates people from Him.

Peter: Sodom was not destroyed because they were all gay but because they wanted to show hatred and dominance to strangers. Nor is sexual immorality in any way dependent on the sexuality of the people concerned. You are simply wrong.

Shane Burgess: Yes because wanting to rape men is really dominance and hatred to strangers. It was homosexual genius their sexual immorality caused judgement to come. They wouldn't of want to rape them if they where not homosexual. You have to be blind not to see that.

Petej: Are you suggesting that every man who has ever r@ped another man is a homosexual?!!!

Shane Burgess: Or bisexual which is just as bad. Any sex with an other man is forbidden. Any sex with someone you are not married to is forbidden. Plus rape all together is wrong in the first place.

Ayoola Hamilton-Tikare #fundie premier.org.uk

Peter: Which of them is it Gods perfect morality to beat within an inch of their lives? I've never known anyone to miss the point as comprehensively as you!

Ayoola Hamilton-Tikare: I don't remember saying anything about beating anyone "within an inch of their lives". That's another later addition by yourself, I'm afraid. The point I'm making is that slavery in the Bible is not the same as our modern idea of stealing and trafficking of people for personal gain. Sometimes it involved a mutual agreemrnt of voluntary servitude. The parable of Jesus that I quoted previously seems to support the idea that masters were allowed to punish servants (or slaves) who misbehaved, even during Jesus' time on earth. There's no mention of "beating within an inch of their lives" anywhere in that passage.

Peter: Exodus 21 v 21 is what you are trying to defend as Gods perfect morality. Beating people to within an inch of their lives. You go on about what sort of person is being beaten as if that's the issue!

Ayoola Hamilton-Tikare: Besides, a person who is beaten within an inch of their lives would not recover within a day or two, suggesting that the beating was not that severe. Again, it's all about the context within which the text was written. Even in the 20th century, the army was allowed to beat offending officers as part of discipline. Nowadays, that's no longer allowed.

Peter: Ha! The verse you're defending says REMAINS ALIVE for a day or two, not fully recovers. You're something else. This is what happens when you put the god of innerrancy before basic morality

Ayoola Hamilton-Tikare: M version says "recovers".

Peter: As in stay alive. Amplified: 21 But if the servant lives on for a day or two, the offender shall not be punished, for he [has injured] his own property. Exodus 21:21 | AMP

Ayoola Hamilton-Tikare: So now it's a matter of which translation you choose? That's neither here nor there. The real issue here is that God does not support people beating their servants or slaves to death. Reasonable chastisement is permissible, but not manslaughter. Verse 20 clearly states that. We too often anachronistically impose our modern ideas of morality on societies of a different era. If you took the time to study what the Bible actually teaches the Israelites about the treatment of slaves in the Old Testament, you would realise that it was actually radical for that era compared to the surrounding cultures.

Peter: Your 'morality' is utterly obscene and a case study in how far we go wrong if we make a god of inerrancy

Ayoola Hamilton-Tikare: And your "morality" is based on something you cooked up from your own worldview that has nothing to do with what the Bible actually teaches.

Ayoola Hamilton-Tikare #fundie premier.org.uk

Let me spell it out. Homosexuality came about when people turned their backs on God and followed their own warped desires, which led to all kinds of evil behaviour, including idolatry and the pursuit of the base sexual desires that God forbade. (There's no greater idolatry than the worship of the self).

The cult of Semiramis was one of such, whose influence later spread throughout the world and can be observed in various pagan religions in ancient Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Rome, etc. The effects of such pagan influence became part of their culture and has been passed down the generations even until the current day.

Martin #fundie premier.org.uk

Remember, you know God exists, you simply pretend you do not to live as you choose. You also have your own god, your will. That is why there are so many gods, actually as many as there are unbelievers. So we can dispense with most of the nonsense in your post.

As for the Bible contradicting itself, it doesn't. That you think it does is just down to your ignorance. If you want to try to prove to me that I'm wrong, please post what you think is a contradiction and I will disabuse you.

Blood Vipre and Martin #fundie premier.org.uk

(=Bible scholar claims passage condemning homosexuals was rewritten=)

Blood Vipre: So if this is true then we can't trust ANY part of the Bible whatsoever, simply because of this article's claims. What utter crap.

Petej: That’s not what he’s saying. He’s not questioning the validity of the canonical version. He’s talking about it’s development.

Martin: Pete, Talking about its development cast doubt on its inerrancy and without inerrancy the Bible is worthless.

I P Knightly #fundie premier.org.uk

(=Regarding pro gay interpretations of scripture=)

"All evidence points to David and Jonathan being having a more than platonic"
What evidence?
"Still doesn't distract from the histrorical and cultural likelyhood that Jesus met a gay centurion, and gave him and his blessing to his lover"
Pure invention. First, learn to spell, second, the evidence is against your interpretation of 'pais'.

Martin #fundie premier.org.uk

Homosexuality is idolatry, it is the worship of yourself, a sort of narcissism where you indulge yourself with someone like yourself. And do you not look like a mortal man?

The Bible doesn't obsess with 'sexuality' because it doesn't exist, as I said. Nor would I have any interest in it if it were not that sinners use it as an excuse for their sin.

Watcher #fundie premier.org.uk

The Creator sets the standards of what is right and what is wrong - whether we fallen human beings like it or not. This also applies to how we should handle our sexual relationships. Thus, His standard is Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve or Madam and Eve.

To reject God's standards is to reject God Himself and those who reject God will be rejected by God with ultimately eternal consequences. Whether or not we interpret that as loving, the fact is that this is what God has revealed about Himself. He is God.

Martin #fundie premier.org.uk

No, Campolo is not an Evangelical, he doesn't consider the Bible is the infallible word of God, nor is Steve Chalke.

Big deal, he's a sociologist. Sociology is sub Christian.

How can the fact that there are babies born now to single parent families be relevant to the number of homosexuals now?

Bad upbringing can be a cause of adult behaviour. Parents know this and good parents make the effort to bring children up properly.

To say that homosexual men don't change is a lie. Indeed Scripture tells us that the change:

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
(I Corinthians 6:9-11 [ESV]) My emphasis

And no, the Bible doesn't say immediately before the statement that being a homosexual is an abomination to God that touching the skin of a dead pig is an abomination. It comes toward the end of a list of sexual acts that are forbidden. Campolo is lying.

Clearly Campolo is ignoring the fact the the Old Testament has different categories of laws, the moral code which always applies and the ceremonial code that ceased with creation of the Church.

What he describes as a 'gay' boy being bullied sounds like the sort of bullying those experience who are weak and bad at sports, and we only have his word that Roger was 'gay'. And why, if he were, should that make any difference? There are plenty of homosexuals around who appear to be good at sports, I suspect this story is made up.

He gives us the lie that Jesus says nothing about homosexuality, the whole Bible is God's word and Jesus is God, so those passages in Leviticus, Romans and 1 Corinthians are all Jesus' words.

And then he tells us that if we aren't selling all we have and giving to the poor we aren't doing what Jesus commanded, that is ignoring the context. Jesus gave that command to one person only for a specific reason, it wasn't a command to all.

His concept of marriage is flawed. He thinks it is about mutual improvement, yet at the heart of it is the sexual union, something that two persons of the same gender can never have.

Compassion seeks to save the sinner from their sin, treating the homosexual as if they are righteous is not compassion, it is hatred.

Martin #fundie premier.org.uk

Martin: Why should courts have the ability to make such legal decisions? That is the job of the executive, not the judiciary.

glenbo: Neither should be illegal as both abortion and same-sex marriage is nobody's business and should be nobody's decision other than those who are at the center of them.

Martin: So you're saying that rape and murder should be legal. €Of course the problem with same-sex 'marriage is that it isn't marriage, it's just a fraud perpetrated on those involved. Since marriage requires a man and a woman to consummate it, your same-gender 'marriage can never be consummated.

glenbo: Not at all. Please don't put words in my mouth. That is manipulative. A woman's pregnancy decisions should only be made by the one who is at the center of it. "Of course the problem with same-sex 'marriage' is that it isn't marriage" Two people of the same gender getting legally married causes NO problems. "it's just a fraud perpetrated on those involved." Marriage is a legal contract. A legal contract entered into by two consenting adults is not fraudulent. "Since marriage requires a man and a woman to consummate it, your same-gender 'marriage can never be consummated." There is no mandate in any marriage law in any state that requires "consummation."

Martin: You said that abortion should be legal. The baby is at the centre of the pregnancy, more so than the woman. Marriage is the joining of two people into one, the contract is of minor importance. Two persons of the same gender cannot be so joined. They had to remove consummation from marital law in the UK because it was impossible to fulfill in same gender 'marriage'. Non consummation was a cause for anulment.

glenbo: Wrong. The mother is, and she is the only one best suited to make decisions, not total strangers who will ignore the child once born. "Marriage is the joining of two people into one," "One" what??? "Two persons of the same gender cannot be so joined." Yes they can legally. And there is no mandate in any marriage law that stipulates any kind of "joining" whatever that means. Marriage is a legal union. It applies to all genders. And what gay people do with their private lives is non of your business. It is not your decision to make if gay couples can wed. Sexual copulation is NOT a mandate in marriage law. You seem to be fixated on sexual behavior. That's just way too creepy.

Martin: No, the baby is at the centre. There is no decision to be made except for those relating to a safe delivery of a healthy baby. One married couple. The law has no say. Marriage is the joining of a man and woman. It would be nice if those who are 'gay', whatever that means, would keep their private lives to themselves and not force it on the rest of us. You know, it's a bit strange how you haven't worked it out that marriage is about sex, two persons of opposite gender joining together in sex. And what do your 'gay' people do but simulate sex?

glenbo: To assert gay couples getting married somehow "forces" something on you is absurd. Gay couples seeking marriage is none of your business. You fixate on sex and not on two people being in love and wanting to protect each other and their children. That's just plain creepy.

Martin: Homosexuality is nothing to do with love. So you cannot claim that they want to marry because of love. It is lust, plain and simple. Of course, what they are doing would be none of my business if they didn't insist on trying to make the rest of us accept it. Ask those making wedding cakes.

P.J Montgomery #fundie premier.org.uk

(=This is the way it's actually spelled out=)

P.J. Montgomery: so are you married??? T S!!! male or female...??? attracted to the opposite sex??? to you??? or other???
their is nothing wrong with real brotherly or sisterly love...but it is the lust element...that sullies it??? it is unnatural!!! and bears no off spring???

TS (unami): I am married to the LOVE of my life, my wife. Yes, another woman. And we are both Christians. I do not appreciate anyone calling our love and our marriage the false things that you accuse.

P.J. Montgomery: BUT...I cannot change the truth of God's word!!! and your partnership is NOT a marriage in the eyes of God??? marriage is between one man and one woman??? who are to be fruitful...??? AND FOR YOU and her...TO BE CHRISTIANS...you both must...
be ' born again ' by The Holy Spirit...without water!!! and that can only happen if you both as individuals hear Jesus cry in the gospels...repent and believe the
good news for the kingdom of heaven is here??? and It is not my fault that...you do not appreciate this??? it is your own fault???

Jim Kirkwood #fundie premier.org.uk

This man should make his mind up. Does he want to contend for the Gospel of Jesus Christ or not. He must take a stand against the LGBT Nazi agenda and be seen doing it. We are not, as Christians, called to be invisible and silent. The Bible is clear on the subject of Homosexual behaviour, despite the persistent denials of the homosexuals and their sympathisers on this forum. Scripture has been quoted over and over again and they reject it because they love their sin and have no intention of being born again. Homosexual practice is an abomination to God. End of debate!

Jim Kirkwood #fundie premier.org.uk

(=Replying to a Gay Christian=)

Jim Kirkwood: Israel is approx the size of Wales. Muslims have millions of square miles of land with all the natural resources and wealth. We all know what the evil religion of Islam really wants, and they will kill and destroy anything that gets in their way to achieving it.

Peter: What a disgusting view. 'Christians' have lots of land too. That's no reason to abolish America.

Jim Kirkwood: You are not in any position to pass judgement on me concerning the meaning of the word "disgusting". The very image you use to represent yourself is disgusting. The Bible calls you and your kind an abomination.

Jim Kirkwood #fundie premier.org.uk

DavidS: Ezekiel 16:49-50 - "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen"
Then in Ezekiel 18:11-13, Ezekiel (talking about Israel) says:
"“He eats at the mountain shrines.
He defiles his neighbor’s wife.
He oppresses the poor and needy.
He commits robbery.
He does not return what he took in pledge.
He looks to the idols.
He does detestable things.
He lends at interest and takes a profit.
Will such a man live? He will not! Because he has done all these detestable things, he is to be put to death; his blood will be on his own head."
Ezekiel calls all these things detestable, including oppressing the poor and needy, he doesn't mention homosexuality at all.

Jim Kirkwood: But the letter of Jude does! Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.!!!!!!!

Arthur Miskelly #fundie premier.org.uk

petej: The reason I am confused is that several people have referred to the lesbian family member as your daughter (inc me) and you haven’t corrected them.
So my question, that you keep not answering, is if you believe she is gay because of “nurture” then why do you blame her for it and not her parents?

Arthur Miskelly: Aha, the penny has dropped. Why should I correct them? Her relationship to me is immaterial. The fact is I love her, and we have always enjoyed a special platonic relationship. Still do. Who said that I don’t blame her parents (mother) certainly wasn’t me? Shouldn’t jump to conclusions, should we? Or make judgments before we know the facts. There is a lesson to be learned here.

petej: I’m not saying that you should have corrected them. I’m saying that it confused me when they assumed that she was your daughter.
You haven’t blamed her mother. You have continually blamed her. My question is that if you believe that she is gay because of the way she was raised then shouldn’t you be blaming her parents and not her?
I’m not making judgements. Im asking you questions about your opinions. I’ve asked you several times now. You don’t seem to be able to answer.

Arthur Miskelly: No matter what I answer Pete you will twist it to point score. That is not the reason I entered this discussion. I entered it to minister to souls who are headed to hell because of the devil’s lie about homosexuality. Genises to Revelation tells me homosexuality is an abomination. I can’t change that and no amount of argument will change that fact. I long for her conversion, and surprisingly, I long for yours. I do not wish to see anyone in hell’s torment for eternity. The bible says it, I believe it, end of story. I was under no obligation to correct anyone on their wrong assumptions. I pray you will be blessed and have the scales removed from your eyes.

petej: Im not interested in scoring points and if you think that about me then you have woefully misunderstood me. I am very concerned about the amount of damage ill thought through hostility towards gay people is causing families.
If you genuinely believe that her upbringing caused her to be gay then I think the blame is with her parents not her. Likewise if this church believes that parents cause homosexuality then the parents should be excluded, not their children or their grandchildren.
I dont know you and I dont know your lesbian family member. I do think it would be impossible that you telling her she is going to hell because she is gay will not have disrupted your relationship with her. Likewise my heart goes out to those families who have been damaged by this ruling.
I have read the whole bible through many times and I do not see anywhere where it mentions gay people. There are a couple of verses where same sex sex is condemned (and no doubt we would disagree on the interpretation there). I dont think the point of the bible is to condemn people for personal characteristics or things about them they have no power to change. I think it is primarily about salvation for all people. Sin is largely a matter for chosen behaviours. It seems to me that your family member didnt choose to be gay (even by your own account) and yet you condemn her for it. It also seems to me that the bible calls us to love our enemies and love in the bible means putting other people first, even if we disagree with them.
When I asked how your love for this lady was manifest, your answer was that you were praying for her to become straight. I think a great sin of the modern church is that it is now teaching that love is no more than prayers for salvation or "speaking the truth in love". That is simply not what Jesus taught. It is not what the apostles taught either. It is a teaching that is anti Christian and is damaging our society in very obvious ways.

Arthur Miskelly: The word “couple” is a collective noun, therefore singular and should be preceded by the singular pronoun “is” not the plural “are”. Having got the grammar lesson out of the road, I never told her that her sexuality would send her to hell. I told her that she needed to repent of it. The only sin which sends people to hell is the rejection of Christ’s sacrifice. I really would suggest that you read the posts more carefully, or else you may make a fool of yourself.

petej: You’ve repeatedly implied, if not said outright, that all gay people are going to hell. Orientation is not something someone can repent from because she has no more power to become attracted to men than you do to change the colour of your hair. Blaming her for something that isn’t her fault and that she has no power to change is unfair and it is almost certainly damaging her relationship with you and with God. If you tell people that they have to become straight before they can have a relationship with God then, if they believe you, they won’t have a relationship with God if they are unable to make themselves straight. I’d also like to encourage you to be a bit more civil and respectful to me. I haven’t used any insults towards you so it would be good if you could keep yours to a minimum.

Arthur Miskelly: You poor sensitive snowflake You obviously cannot cope with being in error. In more ways than one.

Peter Bell #fundie premier.org.uk

Christians are called to love and serve others as Jesus died for all. However, we are not to become entangled in sin. 1Co 9 : 19-23 Heb 12 : 1 also v14-16 Jude 22,23.
You know full well it`s the message on the banner that the printer refuses, not the customer.
God is jealous for those who are His, and commands us to serve no other gods. Ex 20 : 3 also 34 : 14.
Whatever we can`t say "no" to is our god(s). The practice of homosexuality is your god petej, as you`ve tirelessly campaigned on this site for well over two years.
The LGBT have gleefully latched onto a form of revenge against Christians. Equality? They`re not interested. No one hopes for what he already has. Civil Partnership, with celibacy, is equality. Anything beyond that is vengeful.

Mark Jones @ Lord Bertram #fundie premier.org.uk

Lord Bertram: Who are these oppressed and marginalized?

DavidS: In this case same-sex couples and their children.

Lord Bertram: Same sex couples are openly sinning

TS (unami): No they are NOT.

Lord Bertram : According to you but not God who says it is a sin. The Bible has nothing positive to say about same sex sexual relationships

KennyCraig: The Bible has nothing positive to say about bakers, plumbers, professors, and others: all sinners?

Mark Jones: Actually the people in Israel are given instructions on how to bake bread ... so bakers is off your list there ;)

KennyCraig: OK, bakers, slavers and stoners off the list.

Mark Jones: So now you’ll hopefully start to realise why you shouldn’t make silly statements like that Kenny.

KennyCraig: I'm afraid you missed the point.

Mark Jones: You didn’t have an actual point. So no I didn’t. But thanks for trying.

KennyCraig: Speaking of denial...

Mark Jones: That wasn’t denial I’m afraid Kenny.

KennyCraig: No doubt that you're afraid.

Mark Jones: And what exactly am I afraid of there Kenny?

KennyCraig: Oh, you know, Mark, you know...

Mark Jones: So you have nothing to back up your claims as per usual Kenny. Good to know, thanks.

Lord Bertram: That is a ridiculous statement

KennyCraig: Directly proportional to [and clearly refuting] yours: a conduct that is not praised is not necessarily a sin.

Mark Jones: Sorry ... but how exactly did you figure that was a refutation there Kenny?

KennyCraig: Something not praised is not necessarily a sin: is that difficult to understand?

Mark Jones: But something deemed as a sin is a sin: is that difficult to understand?


Mark Jones: I am more willing to support others and give them information that will help fill out some of the blanks.

KennyCraig: So you should also provide information on yourself, as he doesn't believe you wrote insults to @TSawesome. I had to provide him a list: "hateful little witch", "coward", "idiot", "liar" "you're damaging your children", "terrible parent", "utterly evil and repulsive". Sorry if I forgot many, but I don't have so much time (and stomach) to browse your comments.

Mark Jones: I have no shame in stating the things about TS that I have said in the past as they are all factually accurate statements. If you don’t have the stomach to listen to me speaking the truth then that’s an issue with you I’m afraid.

KennyCraig: They are insults, mere shameful insults. Calling them "accurate statements" sheds further light.

Mark Jones: No need for the air quotes there Kenny, they were factual statements. But you already know this and are just trying to paint them as not being so because as heinous of an individual as she is, she’s on your side. Says a lot that really doesn’t it?

KennyCraig: How could "little witch" and "terrible parent" be factual statements?

Mark Jones: Read her comments and then you may understand Kenny.

I've already read them. I followed that discussion at the time, and frankly I think you should find the courage to apologize with her, eventually.

Mark Jones: You clearly didn’t read them properly then. And I’m well aware you were following the thread then ... but you were trolling it so we can’t expect a truthful representation of that discussion to come from you can we? I was hoping you’d grown a bit since that time. I’m suspecting that may not be the case.

KennyCraig: I made the same mistake and probably overestimated your abilities to relate with people. Unfortunately, I see that you're locking yourself into the same attitude. Have a good evening and good luck with the World Cup.

Mark Jones: Lol ... and here is the typical troll tactic make the other person the problem when they don’t get their own. It’s quite an immature way of handling things that Kenny.

Mark Jones #fundie premier.org.uk

glenbo: You claimed the LGBT lobby wanting equality for all LGBT people is a "smokescreen." For what? Proof, please?

Mark Jones: I gave you proof yesterday. So using that argument to prove I’m a liar is not valid. So once again I’ll ask you to prove I’m a liar. While I’m at it, answer me the question you kept dodging yesterday. Was Sid a liar when he said God was imaginary? Because if you stay true to the logic that you used he would be as he didn’t prove that God was imaginary.

glenbo: "I gave you proof yesterday." No you didn't.

Mark Jones: That’s not what the evidence suggests as I can provide screenshots that I did. Here’s screenshot #1 View — uploads.disquscdn.com

glenbo: This proves NOTHING. All this says is that when a gay person gets the shaft from a business owner, they get upset. I don’t blame them. So what is the purpose behind your alleged “smokescreen?”

Mark Jones: But as I say, I’ve exposed you as a liar two days in a row now. So considering you’ve put yourself in this position would you like to admit that if you stand by the logic you used to call me a liar, that makes Sid Rumpo a liar as he could not defend his claim that God was imaginary?

glenbo: Mark...gay people don't want equality just for the sole purpose to beat up on Christians. This is a LIE. You are a LIAR

Mark Jones: When did I say it was just to beat up on Christians Glenbo?
So you not only lie about me being a liar, you also lie about the things I’ve said. You’re not an honest individual really are you Glenbo?

glenbo: Mark, please let me explain this to you... Gay people want equality in order to better their lives. Many wish to marry the one they love. There are many benefits to marriage (1138 federal + hundreds of state benefits) They want protections from being fired or evicted just for being gay, and they wish to protect one another which being marriage does effortlessly. They want to be able to go into a business and be served and treated with respect and dignity just like you and everyone else do. They didn't lead a decades long march and spend tens of millions of dollars just to screw with Christians. That's absurd and illogical. There is no "smokescreen" about wanting to be treated fairly. Gay people aren't out to do bad things to Christians. Quite frankly, they don't care about what religion anyone subscribes to. And many gay people are also Christians. They just want to be able to purchase the same things everyone else does.
That's it. This isn't a lie...this is what gay people truly want. And while there are isolated incidents of Christian businesses getting in trouble with the law, that's because they broke the law in the first place. There are anti-discrimination laws everywhere, and when the rare rogue "Christian" business owner says: Sorry, I don't sell wedding cakes to your kind of people, the rejected people are hurt, get angry and report the offense. Can you blame them? Being discriminated against is psychologically damaging. It truly hurts those being treated with discrimination. If business owners obeyed the law and served all in the public marketplace, we wouldn't be hearing stories like Jack Phillips. And that's it...gay people want their wedding cakes too.
There's no clause in anti-discrimination law that says you may reject gay people at will. It's just not legal. It's also not moral. And it's just not a nice thing to do to people. If sexual orientation is considered a protected class, as it is in Colorado, gay marriage doesn't have to be legal in order to violate this anti-discrimination law. Gay people aren't out to attack Christians, Mark...please understand this.
Yes, some have sued Christian business owners, but their reasons were legitimate and had a catalyst. There had to be a cause for gay people to take legal action against a Christian business owner in the first place. Gay people simply aren't out to attack Christians willy nilly at random for no logical reason, especially if the Christian business owner never did anything wrong or offensive to the gay couples. That just doesn't make sense.
And to quote Judge Judy: "If it doesn't make sense, it's not true." Before prop 8 in California banned same-sex marriage, 18,000 gay couples tied the knot. That's 36,000 gay people successfully getting married and not one Christian was "attacked." Where's the "smokescreen" in California? I just don't understand why you can't get the simple concept that wanting equality is NOT the same as wanting to harm Christians for no reason.
This just simply isn't true.
Perhaps I was wrong in calling you a liar. I would feel hurt if someone called me a liar simply because I believed something different. If this is the case, then I apologize. Perhaps you are/were convinced about this "smokescreen" agenda and perhaps you misunderstand the true nature of most gay people. Yeah, there are idiots in every group. But as a whole, gay people want to peacefully coexist with the rest of society. Is that too much to ask?

Mark Jones: Wow! Nice essay ... oh to continue to prove that you’re a liar. Well done!

glenbo: Utter BULL$HIT. You are a bigot and a manipulative LIAR.

Mark Jones: I never once said that the LGBT rights lobby want to only persecute Christians. Once again you lie about my statement. Why should I prove a claim I never made? If you’re going to call me a liar, don’t lie. It only makes you a hypocrite and a waste of time and space.

glenbo: "I never once said that the LGBT rights lobby want to only persecute Christians. " You said the LGBT rights lobby advocates for LGBT rights to use as a "smokescreen" to persecute Christians. You have NOT provided evidence of this. Therefore, you LIED.

Mark Jones: I did say that, and I did provide evidence of that. Therefore you are still a liar.

glenbo: " I did provide evidence of that. " No you didn't. Show me this "proof."

Mark Jones: Lol, you lying like this is comical.

glenbo: "Lol, you lying like this is comical.' It's okay. You have NO proof. Got it.

Mark Jones: Lol. So you’re enjoying denying that you’ve had the evidence then?

glenbo: So you’re enjoying denying that you’ve had the evidence then?" Is this your "evidence?" ”Christian printer sued” ”Christian baker told he didn’t commit discrimination” "They are against Christians who hold a traditional biblical worldview”

Mark Jones: Nope. You know full well what the evidence is Glenbo. You’re just too dishonest to admit it.

glenbo "You know full well what the evidence is Glenbo. You’re just too dishonest to admit it." Please re-post your "evidence" that LGBT rights advocates intend to use LGBT rights as a "smokescreen" to persecute Christians. Once verified, I will issue a sincere public apology to you for calling you a liar. If I am wrong, I need to be corrected..

Mark Jones: Why so you can call me a liar and say I haven’t posted it again? Sorry Glenbo, but I can’t your word on this, you have proven yourself to be a liar so I have to ask why should I post evidence you’ve already had to just have you lie again and say I haven’t.

glenbo: "Why so you can call me a liar and say I haven’t posted it again?" This is your opportunity to absolve yourself of being a liar. You made a claim, I am asking for proof. If you told the truth, you can re-post your evidence. Please post the evidence that LGBT rights advocates intend to use LGBT rights as a "smokescreen" to persecute Christians.

Mark Jones: Absolve myself of being a liar? When it is you who has been proved to be a liar on multiple occasions whilst you’ve never proven me to be one even once? Tell me Glenbo, do you always expect people to pander to you in discussions like this?

glenbo: Since you have failed to show evidence that LGBT activists want equality in order to persecute Christians, you are a LIAR.

Mark Jones: Since you have failed to show evidence that I haven’t posted the evidence you know I have posted that shows that LGBT activists want “equality” in order to persecute Christians, you are a LIAR. See Glenbo, I can play your game as well. Difference is, I’ll win at your game.

Grace Dalton #fundie premier.org.uk

We need to know more about what "welcoming" means. Of course theys should be welcomed, but trangenderism itself must absolutely not be endorsed.

Being born "in the wrong body" is a concept that utterly rejects God and science. Very rarely, individuals are born with intersex
conditions – but almost everyone has XX or XY chromosomes in every body cell (other than gametes of course). Each human being is a unique, immeasurably valuable individual, God loves them with a love that, like that of a parent, transcends gender - so to change name/anatomy/hormones is unnecessary, and a defiant rebellion against God's perfect plan. We should show transgender people that they are loved, so that they will come into the Christian community where they can be told the Gospel. That doesn't mean that is at all OK to affirm their feelings of being something other than the biological sex that God assigned to them.

What’s most tragic, is that our society’s celebration and encouraging of transgenderism demonstrates it’s rejection of God. It utterly breaks my heart; on the occassions that I've thought deeply about the LGBT movement, I've ended up in tears. Male and female He created us – and yet there is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus – that is God has put each of us into the body He deemed best for us - what actually matters is whether we'll spend eternity with Him, and most people around us don't realise that they're at risk of missing their opportunity. We must continually seek with urgency to do all we can to show Jesus to our world.

(these are useful – obviously I do not necessarily agree with each article

Grace Dalton #fundie premier.org.uk

What’s most tragic, is the rejection of God that our society's celebration of homosexuality demonstrates. It
utterly breaks my heart.

What actually matters is whether we'll spend eternity with Him. But if we're
going to, it means we've chosen to follow Him; this will mean that our
hearts desire to live by His guidelines, and not hold ceremonies rejoicing in
other people (who we should be trying to point towards God) rejecting God's
guidelines. Most people around us (regardless of their sexuality) don't realise
that they're at risk of missing their opportunity to have a relationship that's
infinitely better than any sex. We must continually seek with urgency to do all
we can to to do all
we can to show that Jesus's offer is real, and indisputably worth being
celibate for.

BabaSege #fundie premier.org.uk

BabaSege: My views aren't based on "strident denial". They are as well reasoned and well researched as any other. Darwinian Evolution is nonsensical on a mathematical, molecular biochemical and molecular biomechanical basis. Without the purposeful direction of outside forces, evolution's postulations are scientific impossibilities. Intelligent Design has a lot more going for it scientifically than Darwinian Evolution ever can, on its best day and Biblical Creationism, is simply ONE paradigm for ID. Really? You want to bring the unimaginable complexity and purposeful information characteristics of DNA into a debate about Evolution vs ID?Forget it ... I'm laughing already!!!!

Brent Cantwell: BabaSege, you'll forgive us if we doubt that your strident "there is no evidence for evolution" malarkey a "well reasoned, well researched" conclusion on your part. "Darwinian Evolution is nonsensical on a mathematical, molecular biochemical and molecular biomechanical basis." Redundancy aside, the fact that mention mathematics suggests to me that you don't actually know anything about evolution and instead are just parroting Creationists talking points. "Without the purposeful direction of outside forces, evolution's postulations are scientific impossibilities." Yeah, you definitely don't know what you're talking about.

BabaSege: I know a lot about what I'm talking about. That's the difference between us. I limit my comments to what I do know and what has and can be evidenced scientifically rather than purely on faith grounds, on various sides of the debate.bJust Google Intelligent Design for more info (make sure you go down the back pages the search engines don't really want you to get to where the good stuff is!).

Dan Eastwood: Bluster will get you nowhere. Show us this math you understand so well. Fair warning, I know a bit of math myself.

BabaSege: I absolutely don't need to. Like I said above, don't be lazy and Google ID! The research is there. ID is much more authentic science than Darwinian evolution.

Dan Eastwood: Do not need to, or unable to? I am quite familiar with the arguments for IDC. The entire premise is based on a tacit Bayesian prior assumption that allows no other possibility. IDC is not science at all, but only circular reasoning. Work out the Bayes Factor for yourself, and you will see what I mean. For more detailed mathematical arguments, I refer you to Elsberry and Shallit (2011), Devine (2014), and Rosenhouse (2016).

BabaSege: I repeat, I don't need to. ID is both science and theory, in certain aspects.
However, it's assumptions are logical and scientific, in stark contrast to Darwinian evolution which is dying a death of a thousand cuts. Many self respecting scientists have abandoned it. The more information and knowledge we acquire about the universe and cosmos, the more nonsensical evolution becomes as a credible explanation for it all.

Dan Eastwood: So you are unable. That's OK. Math is hard, and there's no shame in admitting you do not understand difficult concepts.

BabaSege: Don't be lazy!

Dan Eastwood: Don't be absurd.

BabaSege: It's not so complicated. Young Human History (6000+ years). Very aged Earth/Cosmos (however long). These are views accommodated by the Bible. Affirming that science disproves Scripture (or vice versa) unmasks massive ignorance of both. I DON'T need to subscribe to Darwinian evolution and it's supporting belief systems to be consistent with the above

Robert Irv #fundie premier.org.uk

Justine Greening wants the church to "keep up" with the times and allow same sex couples to marry in church. Unfortunatley for her, the Bible says that
"Jesus is the same yesterday and today and forever". The faithful church will NEVER accept same sex marriage.

Grace Dalton #fundie premier.org.uk

Yes, we should engage with gay people - but not support gay activity, which is what the Pride festival is about. Jesus told the woman caught in adultery to go and sin no more; He didn't hurt her, but He also didn't encourage her to be proud of/ continue what she'd done. What’s
most tragic, is that our society’s celebration and encouraging of
homosexuality demonstrates it’s rejection of God. It utterly breaks my
heart; on the occassions that I've thought deeply about the LGBT
movement, I've ended up in tears. What actually matters is whether we'll
spend eternity with Him, and most people around us don't realise that
they're at risk of missing their opportunity. We must continually seek
with urgency to do all we can to show Jesus to our world - He is
infinitely better and more exciting than sex.