|
Post by Morluna on Apr 27, 2006 9:45:32 GMT -5
Cause I just love you that much. Lol, yes this is for a class btw. Villanelle form. My first time writing in it... it was actually pretty hard and some of the lines are awkward because I was trying to stick to the form. R/R PLZ?!?! (Haha, that joke was for Valentine.) But seriously, I would like feedback if anyone would care to comment. Thankies. Organized Religion
Preachers of religion forget the golden rule; sidewalk evangelists make condemnation art Love’s great wisdom is replaced by hatred’s fool.
Compassion and kindness are the greatest tools to enlarging the capacity of one’s own heart. Preachers of religion forget the golden rule.
History shows that in causing hate religion has played the greatest part. But this is forgotten by short-sighted fools.
Did not Jesus teach that we should school ourselves to end suspicion which keeps us apart? Preachers of religion forget the golden rule.
They say, “Gays and sinners all of you’ll Go to Hell! Turn away from your own evil heart!” Like the Pharisees before them they’re heart-hardened fools.
Must every human being fall into the same pool and must we any culture unlike our own thwart? Preachers of religion forget the golden rule. End the killing and the hate – stop the mad fools.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Apr 27, 2006 10:10:27 GMT -5
Morluna, simple question, coming from a biblical standpoint and taking into consideration of what Jesus preached:
"Is one showing hatered or love towards another by letting them continue in what makes them feel happy and good, yet still leads them to eternity in Hell?"
If the preacher's heart is fully convinced of one's fate, then what alternative do we have? GNN interviewed an athiest and even he knew if someone was fully convinced of sin leading to hell and Jesus being the only way, then they sure BETTER be out warning everyone, loud and clear!!! Otherwise they're hypocrits.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 27, 2006 10:59:05 GMT -5
Beautiful, Morluna.
Grant-and everybody else, I recently took a mindful writing class. One of the things that was taught in the seminar was this helpful writing hint. "We are not here as artist to teach or tell the world anything. We are here to invoke something."
That poem may not convice you of anything, but it is a bow on the strings of my heart.
|
|
|
Post by rsmportland on Apr 27, 2006 11:08:08 GMT -5
The poem was...obtuse...to say the least. Religon and Chrisitianity are two different things.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Apr 27, 2006 14:28:20 GMT -5
Beautiful, Morluna. Grant-and everybody else, I recently took a mindful writing class. One of the things that was taught in the seminar was this helpful writing hint. "We are not here as artist to teach or tell the world anything. We are here to invoke something." That poem may not convice you of anything, but it is a bow on the strings of my heart. And if Hell was art, then i would agree with you that I have no place in warning others. But because someone is happy and content as they listen to music with their headphones on, all while their roof is on fire and sure to collapse on them any moment, is it considered love to let them be? Because from their perspective they consider themself safe, but from a different point of view where the roof is seen, they are in grave danger and I should put every ounce of energy to help them see the danger so they will escape it. I do understand your point of view, I spent 28 years with what sounds to be the same one, and so far I haven't been surprised by responses from non-believers. Every year after college, my disgust with Christians got stronger and stronger in regards to what I saw as their "one sided, closed minded" view. I became more "loving" and "giving" to the world, stopped what I considered to be unhelpful to society, supported all forms of tolerance groups, you name it. I was a friend of the world and the world loved me for it. But when I was finally confronted by the LORD Himself, that changed... I changed. And I'd be a hypocrit if I didn't share Him with others.
|
|
|
Post by ejuliot on Apr 27, 2006 14:54:23 GMT -5
I was wondering this for awhile, but have any of the non-christians on this board read the entire Bible all the way through? Or even just the new testament? If so, how did you come to miss so much! You have no idea what Jesus said! I may just be wrong and you are so blinded that you can read it and completely not understand it (entirely possible). I would encourage all nonchristians to read the entire Bible before attacking it or assuming things about it. If you don't you can come off as sounding a little ignorant, not to be harsh.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Apr 27, 2006 15:14:32 GMT -5
Yes Morluna I am guilty of preaching hate. Psalm 97:10 says "Ye that love the Lord HATE EVIL".
Hebrews 1:9 says Jesus "loved righteousness and HATED INIQUITY". I am doing my best to try to be like Jesus.
Proverbs 8:13 says "The fear of the Lord is to HATE EVIL..."
Jesus said in Revelation 3:19, "As many as I love I REBUKE AND CHASTEN; BE ZEALOUS THEREFORE AND REPENT".
We are being Christlike Morluna, you just have a false image of who you think Jesus was.
|
|
|
Post by hopefulheart on Apr 27, 2006 16:41:54 GMT -5
The poem was...obtuse...to say the least. Religon and Chrisitianity are two different things. Uhm... nope... not by any definition I've heard. What's your reasoning for this statement?
|
|
|
Post by rsmportland on Apr 27, 2006 17:49:28 GMT -5
The fundimental doctrine of Christinity is that it's by GRACE ALONE that we're saved...not works. Religon is works...mans attempt to please God...which IS NOT Christianity. The "poem" attempted to fuse the two. Don't poems require research?
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on Apr 27, 2006 17:16:42 GMT -5
The poem was...obtuse...to say the least. Religon and Chrisitianity are two different things. Hi there. Welcome to Dictionary.com. ^_^ re·li·gion - Pronunciation Key (r-ljn) (a noun) 1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe. 2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship. 2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order. 3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader. 4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion. Idiom: get religion - Informal 1. To become religious or devout. 2. To resolve to end one's immoral behavior. extended definitionNow, I'm sorry... could you clarify just how Christianity fails to fall under that definition?
|
|
|
Post by HDmatt on Apr 27, 2006 22:36:55 GMT -5
In my limited knowledge I believe 'religion is used five times in the new testament, four of which the term was used in a bad light. Religion isn't what anyone needs. Correct you are in its divisiveness (if I just spelled that right who's yur gramma!) A person needs a relationship with their Creator! Luke 13:3 I tell you nay, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. (modern english, confess and forsake sin, evil desires, your will, to your Holy Creator, and believe in Jesus as your personal, not someone elses, but personal Savior who bled died for YOUR sins and rose again on the third day defeating death. Don't believe in the check that buys your pardon, TAKE IT! Hebrews 11:6 but without faith it is impossible to please HIM!!!!
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 28, 2006 1:19:07 GMT -5
I was wondering this for awhile, but have any of the non-christians on this board read the entire Bible all the way through? Yes. That too. You know, I'd like to ask you the same question. I could say the same to you. And that's probably more accurate than you know. You see, no one knows what Jesus of Nazareth said. He is quoted quite frequently, but of course the gospels were written some time after Jesus of Nazareth's execution. As a matter of fact, the first parts of today's NT were written by Paul, a man who never encountered Jesus. Besides which, even if you did know what Jesus said, I get the vibe that you didn't hear what he meant. I hate to be redundant, but could I not argue the same for you? Yes, I would too. But I would also encourage everyone who criticises Islam to read the entire Qu'ran. I would encourage everyone who criticises things like evolution and the causes of homosexuality to read the evidence which is supported by science, too. I would encourage those of you who think that gay marraige is a moral issue to make a visit to our poorer inner-city neighborhoods before you criticise people for being immoral. If you can't do these things, do your best with the brain you have. Make logical and rational arguements to the best of your ability. That way you won't come off sounding... Yes, when you rely on dogma or are unable/willing to see eye-to-eye, you can come off as ignorant and harsh.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 28, 2006 1:30:34 GMT -5
Beautiful, Morluna. Grant-and everybody else, I recently took a mindful writing class. One of the things that was taught in the seminar was this helpful writing hint. "We are not here as artist to teach or tell the world anything. We are here to invoke something." That poem may not convice you of anything, but it is a bow on the strings of my heart. And if Hell was art, then i would agree with you that I have no place in warning others. But because someone is happy and content as they listen to music with their headphones on, all while their roof is on fire and sure to collapse on them any moment, is it considered love to let them be? Because from their perspective they consider themself safe, but from a different point of view where the roof is seen, they are in grave danger and I should put every ounce of energy to help them see the danger so they will escape it. I do understand your point of view, I spent 28 years with what sounds to be the same one, and so far I haven't been surprised by responses from non-believers. Every year after college, my disgust with Christians got stronger and stronger in regards to what I saw as their "one sided, closed minded" view. I became more "loving" and "giving" to the world, stopped what I considered to be unhelpful to society, supported all forms of tolerance groups, you name it. I was a friend of the world and the world loved me for it. But when I was finally confronted by the LORD Himself, that changed... I changed. And I'd be a hypocrit if I didn't share Him with others. No, I'm not sure that you do understand my point of view. I was not referring to art as a way of ignoring the situations around you. I was referring to art's ability to touch the heart rather than the brain. Not everything can be expressed through mere words. Sometimes paint or rhyme add to the content. Moreover, these aspects allow each person to take away their own experiences. You're right. If someone's roof is on fire, it is not a time to condemn them for using halogen bulbs, it is a time to pull them out and call the fire department. So, I ask, how is the condemnation of persons with HIV/AIDS supposed to help? How about your abortion clinic protests? Do you really think that these women aren't making a decision which is difficult, perhaps one which they will always agonize over? Sometimes, though, the situation is not so simple. Dietrich Bonhoeffer agonized over his involvement in an attempt to assasinate Hitler. He always said that it was wrong, but he did it anyway. He hoped that God would forgive him, and although he knew what he did was wrong, he did it anyway. Words are oftentimes black on white. The beauty of art is that it can invoke all the colors of the spectrum, many times while only using the simple dark print of the page.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 28, 2006 1:38:31 GMT -5
The fundimental doctrine of Christinity is that it's by GRACE ALONE that we're saved...not works. Religon is works...mans attempt to please God...which IS NOT Christianity. The "poem" attempted to fuse the two. Don't poems require research? I fail to see where the poem attempted to fuse the two. You should reread it. Not once does it mention Christianity. It speaks only of religion. You could substitute any form of dogma there. You don't have to be religious to be spiritual. Exclusivity indicates that you have understood the full nature of God. If someone finite claims a complete understanding of something infinite, then what they are actually claiming is a projection of their finite image (remember, imagination has the same root) onto the infinite. I think the Bible refers to that as Idolatry. I should also point out that religion is not necessarily about works--it is about dogma, which can involve works, but oftentimes does not, e.g. protestantism. Look at the definitions above.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Apr 28, 2006 14:15:29 GMT -5
wanderingtrekker,
Just curious. How much time have you spent in the inner city?
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on Apr 28, 2006 15:02:35 GMT -5
You need Jesus, Morluna...repent
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Apr 28, 2006 15:34:33 GMT -5
You're right. If someone's roof is on fire, it is not a time to condemn them for using halogen bulbs, it is a time to pull them out and call the fire department. So, I ask, how is the condemnation of persons with HIV/AIDS supposed to help? How about your abortion clinic protests? Do you really think that these women aren't making a decision which is difficult, perhaps one which they will always agonize over? Sometimes, though, the situation is not so simple. I don't believe I've put you in any classification and therefore stereotyped you past what you've expressed, if I have then I apologize. But it sounds as if you're suggesting that I am condemning people of actions (ie: halogen buls, Aids patients, or abortion clinics) and not attending to the problem at hand (ie: roof on fire). If someone's house is on fire, I come pounding on their door, they hear the pounding and get upset, accuse me of being violent and intollerable. I explain as best I can that they are in grave danger for their house is on fire and they need to get out as fast as possible! I tell him to spell the smoke, he says its probably from the neighbor's fireplace. I tell him to come out and see from another point of view (the street) and he says he has no need to because he can see things clearly from right there, he knows better. They consider me a loon because they don't see the fire, they look up and don't feel a rush so they mosey back in and close the door. I yell "Don't be foolish! The house will cave in any moment and you'll die! Get out now come to safety!" I'm unable to get inside because the door's locked and he informs me I'll be shot if I break in. He calls the police and informs them a maniac is outside. When the police come, they see the fire and tell him to come out but he's so proud of his own viewpoint and figures we're all idiots... Who's in the right? Should I have let him be because he didn't see it from my viewpoint? Or should I have sung him a song or painted a picture to express things that words weren't able to do? Or should I continue with all my might to show him the proof that his house is on fire so that he will get out to safety? (yes, there was some sarcasm)
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on Apr 28, 2006 15:40:57 GMT -5
wanderingtrekker, Just curious. How much time have you spent in the inner city? Whaaaaat? You need Jesus, Morluna...repent No thanks.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 28, 2006 16:02:56 GMT -5
wanderingtrekker, Just curious. How much time have you spent in the inner city? I live in a crime-ridden, decaying inner city neighborhood in the largest city in the Southeast. I rely mostly on walking and poorly operated and maintained public transportation to get around. The nearest grocery store has been nicknamed "Kroghetto." I am panhandled almost daily and it is not safe to walk around my neighborhood after nightfall. The sidewalks are in such bad shape that pedestrians walk in the street. The last time I reported a crime to the police, they told me that it wasn't serious enough for them to worry about. (It was a drug report). I volunteer my time in homeless shelters as often as possible. One of my favorite activities is planting trees in poor neighborhoods around the city. I am also an advocate for increasing transit service for those who are transit dependent. Why do you ask? Oh, and one more thing, my focus of study is social justice and the inequitable condition of our urban areas.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 28, 2006 16:35:57 GMT -5
Who's in the right? Should I have let him be because he didn't see it from my viewpoint? Or should I have sung him a song or painted a picture to express things that words weren't able to do? Or should I continue with all my might to show him the proof that his house is on fire so that he will get out to safety? (yes, there was some sarcasm) First off, it is rare that the fire situation you describe would happen. Do you honestly think that people haven't inspected your arguements? Most of them are intimately aware of your point of view. But you miss the point of my arguement. I am going to attempt to tell you again. The point of art is not to convice the world of fact. (Such as a house fire) The point of art is to invoke something. For instance, take a poem of Robert Frost's Fire and Ice Some say the world will end in fire, Some say in ice. From what I've tasted of desire I hold with those who favor fire. But if I had to perish twice, I think I know enough of hate To know that for destruction ice Is also great And would suffice. This poem is not meant to inform people of the ending of the world, but rather to invoke thought about what it means to believe in an apocalypse. Or maybe even better, is one of my favorite songs. It was written by John Lennon. Imagine Imagine there is no heaven It's easy if you try No hell below us Above us only sky Imagine all the people Living for today... Imagine there is no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too Imagine all the people Living life in peace... You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will be as one Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man Imagine all the people Sharing all the world... You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will be as one. These things speak not to our brains, but rather to our hearts. That is what art means. This seems rather elementary.
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on Apr 28, 2006 19:40:54 GMT -5
*hugs Trekker relentlessly for the Lennon plug* <333333333333333333
Thanks. Yeah Grant, what he said.
[EDIT] HOLY SHIZA I'M A SENIOR MEMBER!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 28, 2006 19:51:54 GMT -5
This is a hymn by Charles Wesley, though you can read it as a poem. It's called:
[glow=red,2,300]SINNERS TURN![/glow] Sinners, turn: why will you die? God, your Maker, asks you why. God, Who did your being give, Gave Himself, that you might live; He the fatal cause demands, Asks the work of His own hands. Why, you thankless creatures, why, Will you cross His love, and die?
Sinners, turn: why will you die? God, your Savior, asks you why. God, Who did your souls retrieve, Died Himself, that you might live. Will you let Him die in vain? Crucify your Lord again? Why, you ransomed sinners, why, Will you slight His grace and die?
Sinners, turn: why will you die? God, the Spirit, asks you why; He, Who all your lives hath strove, Wooed you to embrace His love. Will you not His grace receive? Will you still refuse to live? Why, you long sought sinners, why, Will you grieve your God, and die?
Let the beasts their breath resign, Strangers to the life divine; Who their God can never know, Let their spirit downward go. You for higher ends were born, You may all to God return, Dwell with Him above the sky; Why will you forever die?
You, on whom He favors showers, You, possessed of nobler powers, You, of reason’s powers possessed, You, with will and memory blessed, You, with finer sense endued, Creatures capable of God; Noblest of His creatures, why, Why will you forever die?
You, whom He ordained to be Transcripts of the Trinity, You, whom He in life doth hold, You for whom Himself was sold, You, on whom He still doth wait, Whom He would again create; Made by Him, and purchased, why, Why will you forever die?
You, who own His record true, You, His chosen people, you, You, who call the Savior Lord, You, who read His written Word, You, who see the Gospel light, Claim a crown in Jesus’ right; Why will you, ye Christians, why, Will the house of Israel die?
Turn, He cries, ye sinners turn; By His life your God hath sworn; He would have you turn and live, He would all the world receive; He hath brought to all the race Full salvation by His grace; He hath not one soul passed by; Why will you resolve to die?
Can ye doubt, if God is love, If to all His mercies move? Will ye not His Word receive? Will ye not His oath believe? See, the suffering God appears! Jesus weeps! Believe His tears! Mingled with His blood they cry, Why will you resolve to die?
Dead, already dead within, Spiritually dead in sin, Dead to God while here you breathe, Pant ye after second death? Will you still in sin remain, Greedy of eternal pain? O you dying sinners, why, Why will you forever die?
What could your Redeemer do More than He hath done for you? To procure your peace with God, Could He more than shed His blood? After all His waste of love, All His drawings from above, Why will you your Lord deny? Why will you resolve to die?
Turn, He cries, ye sinners, turn; By His life your God hath sworn, He would have you turn and live, He would all the world receive. If your death were His delight, Would he you to life invite? Would he ask, obtest, and cry, Why will you resolve to die?
Sinners, turn, while God is near: Dare not think Him insincere: Now, even now, your Savior stands, All day long He spreads His hands, Cries, you will not happy be! No, you will not come to Me! Me, Who life to none deny: Why will you resolve to die?
Can you doubt if God is love? If to all His vowels move? Will you not His Word receive? Will you not His oath believe? See! the suffering God appears! Jesus weeps! Believe His tears! Mingled with His blood, they cry, Why will you resolve to die?
|
|
|
Post by elwing96 on Apr 28, 2006 19:53:43 GMT -5
Don't poems require research? Ummm....no. Poetry is mostly a non-fiction form. That means the author can use their imagination, commonly refered to as "poetic liscence" to make whatever point they want. Do you think Coleridge did research before writing "Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner"? And Morluna. I liked the poem. And if you don't want to repent that's cool with me. I'll still love you.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 28, 2006 22:07:29 GMT -5
And Morluna. I liked the poem. And if you don't want to repent that's cool with me. I'll still love you. Me too!
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Apr 28, 2006 22:18:37 GMT -5
wanderingtrekker,
The reason I ask is I meet many people who go on and on about "the inner city" but never go there themselves. I can see you are not one of those and I am glad to hear that.
I have worked in the inner city for many years and live down the street from a theater nicknamed "Ghetto 8".
You made a statement that seemed to justify immorality in the inner city. Maybe I misunderstood you but I don't think I did. If you do, why do you think immorality is justified in the inner city?
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on Apr 28, 2006 22:51:05 GMT -5
Awww... I feel the love Trekker and Elwing.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 28, 2006 22:51:11 GMT -5
wanderingtrekker, The reason I ask is I meet many people who go on and on about "the inner city" but never go there themselves. I can see you are not one of those and I am glad to hear that. I have worked in the inner city for many years and live down the street from a theater nicknamed "Ghetto 8". You made a statement that seemed to justify immorality in the inner city. Maybe I misunderstood you but I don't think I did. If you do, why do you think immorality is justified in the inner city? Which statement would that be? Are you referring to the police thing or walking in the street, becuase jaywalking is a serious offense (j/k). If you are referring to the drug problem, I actually went to the police precinct to report a druggie, and they told me that they had bigger problems. I am not condoning drug use, actually, I wish they'd arrest this one. If that isn't it, I'm not sure what it is to which you are referring.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Apr 29, 2006 1:42:21 GMT -5
First off, it is rare that the fire situation you describe would happen. Do you honestly think that people haven't inspected your arguements? Most of them are intimately aware of your point of view. But you miss the point of my arguement. I am going to attempt to tell you again. The point of art is not to convice the world of fact. (Such as a house fire) The point of art is to invoke something. It was sarcasm, you know, a joke? But it was a fine way to avoid the rest of my post, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 29, 2006 12:57:20 GMT -5
This is a fine way to avoid my post. Remember, this is about the meaning of art. You avoided, and I redirected, which you consider an avoidance on my part.
You should love your neighbor unconditionally, no matter what. If he has HIV/AIDS, instead of condemning to hell for having a boyfriend, love him. While HIV/AIDS is debilitating and causes premature death, see that he can live a fulfilling life in spite of, and perhaps because of his disease.
You see, it has been my observation that those who are outcasts are the ones who refuse to reject anyone. The movie Chocolat is a great example. In the movie, it is the townspeople who refuse to strictly adhere to religious dogma who actually follow the example of Jesus of Nazareth. Perhaps the most Jesus-like person in the film is the atheist, Vianna. She accepts everyone, from the meek person who steals from her, the one who is the talk of all the town gossip, to the river rats who are refused service at all of the town's shops--that is, except Vianna's.
In the end, we see how Vianna's acceptance and unconditional love--including love for the mayor, who tries to run her out of town--bring the townfolk together in a way which they have never known. In the end, all of the townsfolk exhibit the love which Vianna demonstrated. A love, unfortunately, that was stifled under the strict rules of dogma. Listen to, do not merely hear, the words of the village's young priest:
"I want to talk about Christ’s humanity, I mean how he lived his life on earth: his kindness, his tolerance. We must measure our goodness, not by what we don’t do, what we deny ourselves, what we resist, or who we exclude. Instead, we should measure ourselves by what we embrace, what we create, and who we include."
You say that homosexuals will be going to hell because they have broken God's law. Well, if God sends people to hell for including people, but being promiscuous, God isn't a God that I will worship. If God casts into hell people who love everyone unconditionally, yet love someone of the same sex, then I will call God immoral.
Your neighbor might have heeded your advice and evacuated if you'd treated him with more respect in the past. Perhaps he was tired of your endless bad analogies about hell, and thought you were just doing it again. I know some of my neighbors, and we have a bond of trust. When I was out of town, recently, they helped out by keeping an eye on the house and picking up my mail and newspapers. I do the same for them when they are away. We have a bond of trust. There is no one in my neighborhood that I distrust so much that I wouldn't pay attention to a call for evacuation. So the question should be, 'what did you do to your neighbor that makes him ignore you?'
I am not saying that some homosexuals do not engage in unhealthy and promiscuous behavior, but who among you is pure? There are many loving people out there, and many of them can't find a place in your religion because it puts the law above what is moral--compassion. I'm sure you have read the parable of the Good Samaritan.
In this story, someone is left lying on the road half-dead. A priest and a Levite pass by. They both cross to the other side of the road to avoid violating the levitican code. They, themselves, would become unclean and ostracised if they touched a dead man, since they can't tell if he is dead, they leave him unaided. Samaritans were considered half-breeds and were unclean. They were excluded from the community of the Jews. In this story, someone contemptable to the Jews, a Samaritian, becomes the protagonist of the story because he helps the injured man. He takes him to an inn and pays his medical expenses out of his own pocket.
It is immoral, in the eyes of God, according to scripture, to place religious law above compassion. If God condemns love because it violates a 3000 year old prejudicial edict, then God is heartless.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on Apr 29, 2006 14:19:55 GMT -5
Of course the Gospels were written after Jesus' death, the Gospels are about Jesus' death. Paul wrote a lot of the New Testament but Luke wrote more than Paul; Luke and Acts.
Why don't you (in general terms, not just YOU specifically) quote some of what the Bible actually says to back up your claims about what the Bible really said then? The Christians on here use (usually) scripture scripture scripture to back up the claims they make. The unbelievers who claim to know all about the Bible seem to lack too many references to that Bible when trying to say that "the Bible doesn't say such and such".
I think Micah was referring to this qoute about what does inner city life have to do with justifying immorality...
I ask as well... what does gay marriage have to do with poor inner city neighborhoods?
|
|