Men who hid behind the Bible!

The Bible came to us in our spoken language because men and women were prepared to lay down their lives to translate the texts.

It sounds strange to us today, but some of these people were mercilessly persecuted and even martyred, primarily by the Roman Catholic Church, of which some were former members, for daring to allow the Bible as we know it to reach the general populace, so that we could all read for ourselves the wonderful truth.

Here are some of the heroes of faith who gave their time and lives to bringing the Word of Life to us. They were not perfect, but they did serve God to the best of their ability.

May it never be said that a man of God who preaches the Word ever could be guilty of merely hiding behind the Bible when these men paid such a price to bring it to us!

John Wycliffe
The Council of Constance declared Wycliffe (on 4 May 1415) a heretic and under the ban of the Church. It was decreed that his books be burned and his remains be exhumed. The exhumation was carried out in 1428 when, at the command of Pope Martin V, his remains were dug up, burned, and the ashes cast into the River Swift, which flows through Lutterworth. This is the most final of all posthumous attacks on John Wycliffe, but previous attempts had been made before the Council of Constance. The Anti-Wycliffite Statute of 1401 extended persecution to Wycliffe’s remaining followers. The “Constitutions of Oxford” of 1408 aimed to reclaim authority in all ecclesiastical matters, specifically naming John Wycliffe in a ban on certain writings, and noting that translation of Scripture into English by unlicensed laity is a crime punishable by charges of heresy.

Jan Hus
Jan Hus, often referred to in English as John Hus or John Huss, was a Czech priest, philosopher, reformer, and master at Charles Universityin Prague. After John Wycliffe, the theorist of ecclesiastical Reformation, Hus is considered the first Church reformer (living prior to Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli).

He is famed for having been burned at the stake for heresy against the doctrines of the Catholic Church, including those on ecclesiology, the Eucharist, and other theological topics. Hus was a key predecessor to the Protestant movement of the sixteenth century, and his teachings had a strong influence on the states of Europe, most immediately in the approval for the existence of a reformist Bohemian religious denomination, and, more than a century later, on Martin Luther himself.

Between 1420 and 1431, the Hussite forces defeated five consecutive papal crusades against followers of Hus. Their defence and rebellion against Roman Catholics became known as the Hussite Wars. A century later, as many as 90% of inhabitants of the Czech lands were non-Catholic and followed the teachings of Hus and his successors.

Martin Luther
Martin Luther (10 November 1483 – 18 February 1546) was a German monk, priest, professor of theology and iconic figure of the Protestant Reformation. He strongly disputed the claim that freedom from God’s punishment for sin could be purchased with money. He confronted indulgence salesman Johann Tetzel with his Ninety-Five Theses in 1517. His refusal to retract all of his writings at the demand of Pope Leo X in 1520 and the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V at the Diet of Worms in 1521 resulted in hisexcommunication by the pope and condemnation as an outlaw by the Emperor.

Luther taught that salvation is not earned by good deeds but received only as a free gift of God’s gracethrough faith in Jesus Christ as redeemer from sin. His theology challenged the authority of the Pope of theRoman Catholic Church by teaching that the Bible is the only source of divinely revealed knowledge and opposed sacerdotalism by considering all baptized Christians to be a holy priesthood.Those who identify with Luther’s teachings are called Lutherans.

His translation of the Bible into the vernacular (instead of Latin) made it more accessible, causing a tremendous impact on the church and on German culture. It fostered the development of a standard version of the German language, added several principles to the art of translation, and influenced the translation into English of the King James Bible. His hymns influenced the development of singing in churches. His marriage to Katharina von Bora set a model for the practice of clerical marriage, allowing Protestant priests to marry.

William Tyndale
William Tyndale (sometimes spelled TynsdaleTindallTindillTyndall; c. 1492 – 1536) was an English scholar who became a leading figure in Protestant reform in the years leading up to his execution. He is remembered for his translation of the Bible into English. He was influenced by the work of Desiderius Erasmus, who made the Greek New Testament available in Europe, and by Martin Luther.

While a number of partial and complete translations had been made from the seventh century onward, the popularity of Wycliffe’s Bible in the 14th century resulted in a ban on the publication of the Bible in English; almost all vernacular Bibles were confiscated and burned. Tyndale’s illegal translation was the first of the new English Bibles of the Reformation, and the first to draw directly from Hebrew and Greek texts, and the first to take advantage of the new medium of the print, which allowed for wide distribution. This was taken to be a direct challenge to the hegemony of both the Roman Catholic Church and the English church and state. Tyndale also wrote, in 1530, The Practyse of Prelates, opposing Henry VIII’s divorce on the grounds that it contravened scriptural law.

In 1535, Tyndale was arrested and jailed in the castle of Vilvoorde outside Brussels for over a year. He was tried for heresy, choked, impaled and burnt on a stake in 1536. The Tyndale Bible, as it was known, continued to play a key role in spreading Reformation ideas across the English-speaking world. The fifty-four independent scholars who created the King James Version of the Bible in 1611 drew significantly on Tyndale’s translations. One estimation suggests the New Testament in the King James Version is 83% Tyndale’s, and the Old Testament 76%.

75 thoughts on “Men who hid behind the Bible!

  1. Is there a platform, Greg?

    No. I admire these men because they stood fro the Word. They did not hide behind it.

    Say what you want. You stand, mostly, against the Word, so what skirts do you hide behind?

    I’ll continue to stand for the Word, inspired by those who went before.

  2. Well it would be doctrinally sound for you to get behind me, but I don’t wear skirts, so there’d be nowhere to hide.

  3. By the way, Wycliffe, in his latter years, was amongst the first to call out the pope as the antichrist. That took some guts considering the secular power the papacy wielded.

    Today we stand for marriage, as it is defined in the Word.

    We may not be threatened with death for holding to the Truth, but you are, regrettably, an example of people who are glad to be critical of Christians for believing God and taking Him at His Word.

  4. There is a huge difference between standing with the Bible in speaking truth to power, and hiding behind the Bible to deny rights to minorities.

    George Whitefield, famed for his sparking of the so-called Great Awakening of American evangelicalism, campaigned, in the Province of Georgia, for the legalisation of slavery; slavery had been outlawed in Georgia, but it was legalised in 1751 due in large part to Whitefield’s efforts.

    In both Europe and the United States many Christians went further, arguing that slavery was actually justified by the words and doctrines of the Bible.

    [Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God…it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation…it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts – Jefferson Davis, President, Confederate States of America
    Every hope of the existence of church and state, and of civilization itself, hangs upon our arduous effort to defeat the doctrine of Negro suffrage – Robert Dabney, a prominent 19th century Southern Presbyterian pastor
    … the right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example – Richard Furman, President, South Carolina Baptist Convention

    George Whitefield was one of the founders of Methodism and of the Evangelical movement and the best known preacher of his time in both Britain and America. So this great man stood firmly on the Word of God, plain and simple, against those namby-pamby liberals to enslave, demean and debase a whole race of people and to ensure that this enslavement was recorded in the law of the land.

  5. @wazza

    “hiding behind the Bible to deny rights to minorities.”

    Our reasons have nothing whatsoever to do with denying rights to minorities. It’s about what is right and wrong according to scripture. You, Greg and Bones seem to be wringing your hands about those “poor, oppressed gay people”, whilst completely ignoring the fact that the bible (the book whose authority you conveniently draw upon when it suits you when criticising pentecostal ministers as being ignorant of scripture) is very clear about the practice of “going after strange flesh”. The rights of a minority simply don’t enter the equation at all. There are many, many minorities who’s rights deserve to be championed if we follow your logic – polygamists, pederasts, beastialitists (if there is such a word), necrophiliaists etc. You must be consistent wazza. Support the minority of homosexuals, therefore you must support these minorities too.

    Do you see the absurdity in your arguments now?

  6. Roundhouse: “Do you see the absurdity in your arguments now?”
    Wazza: “Yes, I see it now Roundhouse. Thanks for explaining.”

    This gave me my first and only laugh of the day.

  7. @Q

    Yes, I’m not sure whether to take his answer seriously or not! I’d like to think that he has, but my gut tells me he’s just being facetious

  8. @Greg

    “And so, following your logic, Rudehorse, we should support Islamists in Egypt because they just want to set things up according to gods word…support you, support them.”

    A ridiculous argument Greg. Are you that stupid that you would equate God’s precepts in His word with the ravings of a madman in the Quran? I fear for those people at Zacs Place. Do they know what kind of a man you are?

  9. @Greg

    “It’s exactly the same as saying supporting the rights of the gay minority means we should support the rights of the beastialist minority ”

    How? What is the difference? You are all about supporting minorities, regardless of whether that minority’s actions or beliefs defy scripture. You tell me why it’s ok to support homosexuals and not those other minorities, and please, explain it to me without trying to throw unicorns at me.

    “have their own understanding of scripture”

    So, you interpret scripture any way you want?

  10. Actually, wazza2, it was Wesley who was the founder of Methodism. Whitfield was an evangelist. Both were friends, even though Wesley was Arminian and Whitfield a Calvinist.

    The equivalence between slavery and what constitutes godly marriage is strained an contrived. There is no comparison. Slavery was clearly wrong.

    Marriage, as it stands in law, is not.

    What we are seeing is a push by homosexuals and lesbians to change marriage to mean something it isn’t.

    I am convinced that both Whitfield and Wesley would have resisted the pressure to allow homosexuals to marry. And they would have stood on the Bible, as I do, as the real arbiter in this debate.

  11. I wish I could be a Christian like Martin Luther. NOT!

    Let’s not forget that Martin Luther’s antisemitic teaching directly inspired National Socialism. His teachings still resonate with the far right. We like to champion this hero of Protestantism when he would in reality have been charged at Nuremburg with the other Nazis.

    In 1543 Luther published On the Jews and Their Lies in which he says that the Jews are a “base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth.”[13] They are full of the “devil’s feces … which they wallow in like swine.”[14] The synagogue was a “defiled bride, yes, an incorrigible whore and an evil slut …”[15] He argues that their synagogues and schools be set on fire, their prayer books destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes razed, and property and money confiscated. They should be shown no mercy or kindness,[16] afforded no legal protection,[17] and these “poisonous envenomed worms” should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time.[18] He also seems to advocate their murder, writing “[w]e are at fault in not slaying them”.[19]

    Luther’s sentiments were widely echoed in the Germany of the 1930s, particularly within the Nazi party. Hitler’s Education Minister, Bernhard Rust, was quoted by the Völkischer Beobachter as saying that: “Since Martin Luther closed his eyes, no such son of our people has appeared again. It has been decided that we shall be the first to witness his reappearance … I think the time is past when one may not say the names of Hitler and Luther in the same breath. They belong together; they are of the same old stamp [Schrot und Korn]”.[54]

    Hans Hinkel, leader of the Luther League’s magazine Deutsche Kultur-Wacht, and of the Berlin chapter of the Kampfbund, paid tribute to Luther in his acceptance speech as head of both the Jewish section and the film department of Goebbel’s Chamber of Culture and Propaganda Ministry. “Through his acts and his spiritual attitude, he began the fight which we will wage today; with Luther, the revolution of German blood and feeling against alien elements of the Volk was begun. To continue and complete his Protestantism, nationalism must make the picture of Luther, of a German fighter, live as an example ‘above the barriers of confession’ for all German blood comrades.”[55]

    According to Daniel Goldhagen, Bishop Martin Sasse, a leading Protestant churchman, published a compendium of Luther’s writings shortly after Kristallnacht, for which Diarmaid MacCulloch, Professor of the History of the Church in the University of Oxford argued that Luther’s writing was a “blueprint”.[31] Sasse “applauded the burning of the synagogues and the coincidence of the day, writing in the introduction, “On November 10, 1938, on Luther’s birthday, the synagogues are burning in Germany.” The German people, he urged, ought to heed these words “of the greatest antisemite of his time, the warner of his people against the Jews.”[56]

    William Nichols, Professor of Religious Studies, recounts, “At his trial in Nuremberg after the Second World War, Julius Streicher, the notorious Nazi propagandist, editor of the scurrilous antisemitic weekly Der Stürmer, argued that if he should be standing there arraigned on such charges, so should Martin Luther. Reading such passages, it is hard not to agree with him. Luther’s proposals read like a program for the Nazis.”[57] It was Luther’s expression “The Jews are our misfortune” that centuries later would be repeated by Heinrich von Treitschke and appear as motto on the front page of Julius Streicher’s Der Stürmer.

    So you can be a Christian and an antisemite advocating genocide.

    But you can’t be a Christian and be gay. Or be gay and married.

    Seems the holocaust, genocide and persecuting others isn’t as important to God as say gay rights which is what He really cares about.

    But of course Martin Luther was a man of his time, whereas Martin Luther King and Desmond Tutu and Christians who fight for the rights of others are unregenerate, false god worshipping semi/false Christian apostates.

    Yep that only makes sense to someone who has a delusional view of Scripture, God, Jesus and the world.

  12. Greg, you seem to be implying, as Bones did on the other thread, that Christians are forcing a law change, when in fact they are supporting existing legislation on marriage which states that it is legally between a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others. A totally Biblical concept, which we support.

    This Bones, and now you, converted into some kind of push for shariah by the evangelical Church! A totally ludicrous and unreasonable argument. The fact that you are having to stoop to this level of debating tactic tells me you have nothing much to offer by way of argument.

    It is the homosexual and lesbian lobby which is pressing for change, Greg. They are zealots in this case. They are the ones organising rallies and lobbyists and a united front to bring about change. You can’t blame them for this. It is perfectly normal way of going about things, and I believe they will achieve their aims.

    But this doesn’t mean, at all, that the Church is in any way forcing anything unto a minority group. It means that we, as Christians, believe in what we stand for, and that we are well able to articulate our perspective.

    You, Bones and wazza2 speak almost exclusively from a secular humanist point of view. That is very clear, and understandable, but throwing around insults at people who trust what the Bible says because you don’t believe what it says only declares you to be more of a humanist that a Christian in your point of view.

    But tacking on stupid and illogical arguments is more of a decimation of humanist thought than a crushing blow to Biblical accuracy.

  13. Oh dear! Godwin’s law from Bones.

    At least now we know you support homosexual marriage.

    All very admirable from a secular humanist perspective, and completely rational in worldly terms.

    So Greg and Bones yell at people for raising the equivalence of pedophilia, yet they will stoop to pronouncing sharia and nazism comparative to defending marriage as an institution between a man and a woman, as it is clearly proclaimed by Jesus.

    Is, then, Jesus a proponent of either sharia or nazism, Bones, because he tells us exactly what marriage is?

  14. But, it is easy to comment on this. Unfortunately for Martin Luther, and even others who came out of Roman Catholicism, including Hus, Tynedale and Wycliffe, he was a product of his mother church, and many of the things he believed he inherited from the papacy.

    Bit by bit people broke out of that darkness, and, to an extent we still are, but it is clear that, for many years, the Church, including Protestantism, has carried some of the weaknesses of the Apostasy.

  15. “[…] we allow people to think and challenge and have their own understanding of scripture […]”

    As opposed to being led into all truth by the Holy Spirit as He illuminates Scripture – which is in fact the *only* way that Scripture can be correctly divided.

    No wonder you are a complete and utter theological basket case, Greg: you are an explorer who has a map, but it’s no use to you at all because you steadfastly refuse to use a compass…

  16. You’re kidding right. Nothing to do with Godwin’s Law. A Nazi would be proud of this:

    He argues that their synagogues and schools be set on fire, their prayer books destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes razed, and property and money confiscated. They should be shown no mercy or kindness,[16] afforded no legal protection,[17] and these “poisonous envenomed worms” should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time.[18] He also seems to advocate their murder, writing “[w]e are at fault in not slaying them”.[19]

    So you can be a Chistian and an antisemite advocating genocide.

    But you can’t be a Christian who advocates for equality for all.

  17. “I wish I could be a Christian like Martin Luther. NOT!”

    Why don’t you try being a Christian like Christ, Bones? (It would make a nice change for all of us, and not least of all you).

  18. “Nothing to do with Godwin’s Law.”

    Only because you said it, Bones – if it were anyone else talking about the Nazis, it would be Godwin to the max, and one of the most despicable acts by a lowlife scumbag that anyone could imagine.

    You are truly the pope of signposts02, aren’t you.

  19. “But you can’t be a Christian who advocates for equality for all.”

    Here’s a newsflash that’s just come in, Bones: the majority of people will end up going through the broad gate that leads to destruction – so there’s no “equality for all” in eternity.

    If you could just get your head around that fact, maybe you’d stop carrying on like all those pathetically weak and insipid left-wingers who hide behind pulpits because they lack the character, the ability and the guts to do anything substantial in the real world.

  20. ‘Equality for all”? I should really let you qualify or define that, Bones, before it receives the treatment it deserves.

    But I can’t be bothered…

    God on equality…

    2 Corinthians 6
    14 Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?
    15 And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever?
    16 And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will dwell in them And walk among them. I will be their God, And they shall be My people.”
    17 Therefore “Come out from among them And be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, And I will receive you.”

    But wait, there’s more…

    Ephesians 5
    11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.
    12 For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret.
    13 But all things that are exposed are made manifest by the light, for whatever makes manifest is light.
    14 Therefore He says: “Awake, you who sleep, Arise from the dead, And Christ will give you light.”
    15 See then that you walk circumspectly, not as fools but as wise,
    16 redeeming the time, because the days are evil.

    It doesn’t end there…

    Revelation 21
    7 “He who overcomes shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and he shall be My son.
    8 “But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

    I could go on, at length, actually, but you get the drift!

  21. On sexual immorality and the temple, which believers, that is true Christians, are called, God is very clear, and we should be in no doubt about what Paul means when he reveals God’s will on the use of the temple.

    1 Corinthians 6
    15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a harlot? Certainly not!
    16 Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For “the two,” He says, “shall become one flesh.”
    17 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.
    18 Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.
    19 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?
    20 For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s.

    So, not only would you allow the Temple of the Holy Spirit be joined to another man in buggery, you would allow that to take place within the sanctity of holy matrimony by allowing those men to be joined as one under God.

    Ain’t gonna happen, not in God’s eyes. Never. Ever. No way!

    Please, Bones, Greg, you have got to open your eyes to what God is very explicitly telling you.

  22. My eyes were finally opened by Roundhouse’s Biblical arguments, and I saw what a confused person I really was. I went back to Bible-based believing and its really amazing to be finally saved. Halleliuah!!!

    I now take the Bible at its word, and at church I asked everyone who was on their second marriage to put up their hand. When they did, I said “You are all adulterers! You should repent from your evil lifestyles and reconcile with your former partners.”

    Then they started whining, something about “Wah..Wah.. My former husband used to beat me..” or “Wah.. Wah. My former wife now has four children with her new husband.” I said it to them straight “Don’t argue with me, go tell Jesus about it, Because I didnt make the rules, I’m just telling you what is in the Bible. Sin is Sin, man, and I wouldnt be doing God’s work without telling them so.

    It felt really good leaving that church knowing that I’ve helped those people and stood up for God’s way. I hope I never get divorced, but I’m sure now that I’m Bible-believing that God wont let that happen.

    Anyway, I wanted to thank Roundhouse, Steve and the others for showing me the light. Sorry for being a confused liberal, but now at least I’m not confused. I have a clear standard by which to hold others to account.

  23. We have spoken openly to you, our heart is wide open. You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted by your own affections.
    2 Corinthians 6:11

    The weakness of your parody, wazza, is in its appeal to sentiment, and not to Biblical precedent. You are restricted by your own affections.

    You appeal to the emotions because there you will receive a sympathetic response from those who identify with the hardship of being on the other side of the hardships life throws up.

    Just as Bones goes to slavery and Greg to sharia, you turn to divorce. It’s easy to see why.

    You have no appeal to some kind of fault with marriage as it is. You cannot find a flaw in God’s perfect plan for holy matrimony.

    So you resort to secondary controversies and entreat the senses.

    Slavery was wrong, so the activists fought long and hard for abolition. Quite right. We all agree. But it does not equate to a struggle to change what is already perfect in the marriage vows.

    Sharia is controversial because it imposes law on its citizens without recourse to an appeal system, or to mercy. But this does not equate to a legalistic view of marriage, because it is not based on law, but on love.

    But, as with all things in the Kingdom of God, love has boundaries, otherwise it will be violated. If love in marriage is to remain intact for the sake of the fruitful progeny of marriage, and the divinely decreed ideal of godly marriage, then there has to be a revelation from heaven of what is expected by and for those who enter into the vows of marriage before God.

    So there is, by necessity, inclusion and exclusion in marriage. The inclusion is the man and the woman, accompanied by their offspring. The exclusion is all others, where God declares that no person should come between the husband and the wife.

    Divorce is a tragedy because it breaks the family apart and separates those who have made solemn vows before men, and, ultimately, before God. It declares that the breakdown is so extreme that it is irreparable, despite the fact that God is the mender of hearts and healer of the broken.

    When people deny or cheapen marriage God’s way they perceive of ways to end marriage and corrupt marriage. When the marriage vows are devalued by false expediency, the fabric of society is torn and the reasons for marriage are lost on the generations which have been shipped out into the mists of evaporated understanding on their way the a new world of diminished responsibility.

    But it doesn’t change the fact that marriage was both instituted by God for His people, and is His way of fashioning and uniting families, clans, nations and kingdoms under His authority. He is still the God who initiated marriage between a husband and wife who leave their parents and cleave to one another.

    If people have rebelled and walked away from His will it is not His fault. Jesus was sent to restore the family. He spoke of the family in terms of the married couple, and man with his wife. He spoke very strong words of warning to those who considered breaking the marriage union apart.

    We could all appeal to tales of great sadness and woe, and produce heart-rending stories of broken people, but none of it negates what God has spoken and written concerning marriage, matrimonial vows, who is qualified for marriage, and what His expectation is for godly marriage.

  24. Thats exactly what I said to the divorcees. I really feel sorry for those that have to leave their current partners, and its really heart-rending to hear their stories about having to remain celibate for the rest of their lives, and dying alone. But none of that negates what Jesus clearly said about divorce.

    I hope I got the balance right there, with a nod to the sadness of the people affected. I’m a bit new to all this Bible-based moralising. Its sometimes hard to disguise the fact that you are being a hard-nosed bastard, but I’m learning.

  25. So you consider God to be a hard-nosed bastard for telling people homosexual sex is an abomination?

    And, therefore, anyone who agrees with what God has said must also be one of the hard-nosed bastard children.

    But how can you argue against what He has said? If it is an abomination outside of marriage, it certainly is inside of it.

    But, then, the moralist, which you always have been, will always find a way to weasel their way around truth to suit their agenda.

    Your argument is such a miserable travesty it comes very close to the luke warmness Jesus will vomit out.

    Oh, but that is hard-nosed bastard talk, isn’t it?

    What would you have us all do, including God? Change marriage to fit your concept of fairness?

    I mean, really. This is joke!

  26. Did you really think, when you became a Christian, that the way would be so easy that you could bend the Word of God to suit your concept of what it means to be a disciple?

    Did you think that when Jesus said we have to take up our cross daily, he meant one of those little shiny trinkets you can buy at the jewellers, and hang around your neck on a slimline, lightweight gold chain over a black U2 t-shirt?

    Did you think the narrow way means the street festooned with Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras floats and you on the side waving your white flag of surrender to their onward march?

    Why don’t you roll over and let the world run you down its broadway to destruction? Didn’t Jesus say something about easy street?

    What exactly do you think Paul meant when he spoke about the children of disobedience? Was he saying that we should have compassion on their sinfulness and beg the authorities to make laws which would accommodate their lawlessness?

    Yes, wazza, God is rather hard-nosed about some things. here’s some hard-nosed talk for you to digest”

    Romans 1
    20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
    21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
    22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
    23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man–and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
    24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,
    25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
    26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.
    27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
    28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
    29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,
    30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
    31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful;
    32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

    Ouch! You mean God doesn’t like these kinds of people? That’s a rather large list, don;t you think?

    What are you going to do with it, wazza? Are you going to slander us for actually believing that God means what he says in this passage?

    Are you going to look for a way to criticise God and his people for saying that human beings, people with feelings and sensibilities, and emotions and hearts and minds are listed here, and surely there must be a way to support them through their crisis of judgement?

    Hard-nosed! Dear Lord, you haven’t heard the half of it when He comes in wrath to judge the world.

    That’s why we’re still here, wazza. To help people see the truth before He comes to burn this place up, not to find ways to help them perpetuate their error!

  27. And here’s something else for you to ponder while you’re at it.

    What if it’s not so much God that is hard-nosed, but you and those you champion who are hard-hearted?

    What if he has already give you, being a supporter of their sin, over to delusion and hard-heartedness because you refuse to acknowledge or believe His Word?

    What if God is right and you are not?

    What then, eh?

    Wil you protest in the Face of God when you smell the stench of His wrath over those who persist in rebelling against His Word?

    Here’s some more hard-nosed talk for you to digest:

    3 Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.
    4 For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.
    5 But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.
    6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day;
    7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
    8 Likewise also these dreamers defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries.
    9 Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”
    10 But these speak evil of whatever they do not know; and whatever they know naturally, like brute beasts, in these things they corrupt themselves.
    11 Woe to them! For they have gone in the way of Cain, have run greedily in the error of Balaam for profit, and perished in the rebellion of Korah.
    12 These are spots in your love feasts, while they feast with you without fear, serving only themselves. They are clouds without water, carried about by the winds; late autumn trees without fruit, twice dead, pulled up by the roots;
    13 raging waves of the sea, foaming up their own shame; wandering stars for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.

    I do believe it’s a sin for the Church to be so lulled into a pacifistic sense of airy-fairy euphoria that we forget that God is a Jealous, Zealous God with awesome power, who loves us so intensely he sent Jesus to the cross to pay for our sin and open the way back to him, and pours out his Spirit on all flesh, but gives us clear warning and a certain amount of time to acknowledge him and get our lives right before he pours out his wrath on the earth at the end of days.

    Romans 9
    18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.
    19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?”
    20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?”
    21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?
    22 What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,
    23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory,
    24 even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

  28. @wazza

    ” I went back to Bible-based believing” and “I’m a bit new to all this Bible-based moralising. ”

    There you have it.The admission that wazza despises the bible, and despises true believers’ belief in it. And then he goes on to throw scripture at us! Oh, the hypocrisy! Wazza, don’t you dare presume that you have the right to use scripture to base any of your arguments on. You are a despiser of the word, and by extension a despiser of the author of thast word – God. And your attempt to justify your ungodly beliefs simply point you out as the hypocrite you are. As I pointed out to Bones in an earlier post, the bible tells us that we shall know His sons by their fruit. Your fruit is putrid. You should be shaking in your boots my friend, because you are in for one HELL of an eternity

  29. Sorry youre wrong but thanks for playing. The very fact that I am now a bible-based believer means I have a guaranteed ticket out of here when the rest of you are going to BBQ.

    As long as I dont offend the Bible, I can offend and oppress as many people as I like. Including you. And if I can use the Bible to oppress and offend so much the better.

    Good luck for the future, maybe a bit of sun-screen might help. Cheers.

  30. Can anyone tell me what the Israelites did with the virgin Midianite girls (how old?) in Numbers 31?

    The Bible gives us our morality!! In reality this chapter alone would have Moses in front of a war crimes tribunal.

  31. @wazza, Greg and Bones

    Your theological gymnastics are tying you up in knots! The absurdity of your position is obvious, but the more you try and justify your ant-biblical arguments, the loopier you make yourselves look. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious.

    @Greg, your Zac’s Place cult members may think that your humanist theology is AOK, but the weight of scripture has found your shallow, man-made theology wanting.

    @Bones, I feel like I am engaging in debate with an bitter atheist judging by your usage of scripture as some kind of offensive (it the putrid sense) justification for a disbelief in the written word of God. That a person professing to be a believer would resort to the exact same kind of argument is sickening. I can only come to the conclusion that you are a liar, fooling us into believing you are a Christian, whilst actually engaging in the work of the devil – “Did God really say that?”

  32. @Greg

    “Can you tell me if the bible is the only source available to good Christians for decisions about morality? ”

    From where else does it come, if not from the Judeo-Christian code of morals as laid out in the word of God? Are you placing this biblical morality beneath the humanist morality? The morality that allows the legal murder of hundreds of thousands of unborn children every day? The morality that says the mother’s choice is more important than a child’s right to life? The morality that encourages young people to engage in sexual activity whenever they want, and in fact mocks and denigrates when someone professes to be waiting until marriage before they have sex? The morality that places near-naked women on billboards, nudity on prime-time TV, and violence and gore in M rated films and video games? Greg, you’ve lost it I’m afraid. Your support of this worldly “morality” over God’s precepts makes you unfit to call yourself a child of God.

  33. @wazza

    “The very fact that I am now a bible-based believer… ”

    You are a liar. An absolute liar. Do you think we are that stupid to believe that?

  34. @wazza

    “As long as I dont offend the Bible, I can offend and oppress as many people as I like. Including you. And if I can use the Bible to oppress and offend so much the better.”

    Oh, but you ARE offending the bible, my friend. And you are offending the Holy Spirit, who inspired the WHOLE bible.

    And your next statement – “if I can use the Bible to oppress and offend so much the better.” simply beggars belief! My God! What astounding arrogance! I am sorry, but I am simply stunned! How can ANYONE professing to be a believer EVER make a statement like that?!! I don’t know what to say! I have NEVER seen anyone s**t on the bible, on God and on His Holy Spirit as much as you have in that one statement. Wow. Just wow. This argument has taken on a very, very sinister turn

  35. Great news guys… Some of my friends said my personality had changed, so I went to the doctors. He did a brain scan and found a small tumour.

    Basically this tumour was affecting my sense of empathy and sympathy for others. It made me relate to God and other people in a very strictly limited rule-based way. I had turned the Bible into merely a book of law and was imposing it on other people as a very disfunctional way of relating to them and to God.

    Anyway, it was removed and I’m back to the same ol’ Wazza as before – I’m not a fundamentalist anymore. A good thing too, because I wouldnt have wanted to live like that.

    So where were we with this discussion, you’ll have to fill me in. Also, you guys might want to get the same kind of scan… it couldnt hurt.

  36. But Greg can’t you see the moral values that Roundnose wants us to live by. Who actually tells us that genocide, torture and rape is a crime?

    Legal rape of females:
    According to Deuteronomy 22:28-29. a virgin female who was not engaged to be married and who was raped was required to marry her attacker, no matter what her feelings were towards the rapist. Most women would probably find it difficult to develop a love bond with the man and thus would have to submit to marital sexual activity against her will. That is, she had to accept being continually raped after she was married.

    A man could become married by simply sexually attacking a woman that appealed to him, and paying his new father-in-law 50 shekels of silver. That payment would compensate the woman’s father for the loss in value of one of his possessions: his daughter.

    Deuteronomy 21:11-14 describes how each captive woman would shave her head, pare her nails, be left alone to mourn the loss of her families, friends, and freedom. After a full month has passed, they would be required to submit to their owners sexually, as a wife. It is conceivable that in a few cases, a love bond might have formed between the soldier and his captive(s) during that month. However, in most cases we can probably assume that the woman had to submit sexually against her will; that is, she was raped.

    2 Samuel 12:26-31: “…Joab fought against Rabbah of the children of Ammon, and took the royal city. And Joab sent messengers to David, and said, I have fought against Rabbah, and have taken the city of waters. Now therefore gather the rest of the people together, and encamp against the city, and take it: lest I take the city, and it be called after my name. And David gathered all the people together, and went to Rabbah, and fought against it, and took it…And he brought forth the people that were therein, and put them under saws, and under harrows of iron, and under axes of iron, and made them pass through the brick-kiln: and thus did he unto all the cities of the children of Ammon.”

    Deuteronomy 7:1-2:

    “… the seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them.”

    Joshua 6:21:

    “And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.”

    Joshua 10:40-41:

    “So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded. And Joshua smote them from Kadesh-barnea even unto Gaza, and all the country of Goshen, even unto Gibeon.”

    Joshua 7:20-25:

    “…Achan answered Joshua, and said, Indeed I have sinned against the LORD God of Israel… And Joshua, and all Israel with him, took Achan the son of Zerah, and the silver, and the garment, and the wedge of gold, and his sons, and his daughters, and his oxen, and his asses, and his sheep, and his tent, and all that he had: and they brought them unto the valley of Achor. And Joshua said, Why hast thou troubled us? the LORD shall trouble thee this day. And all Israel stoned him with stones, and burned them with fire, after they had stoned them with stones.”

    In Psalms 137:8-9, God is asked to bless those who would bash Babylonian babies against stones in an act of mass infanticide.

    Numbers 31

    On God’s instructions, Moses sent 12,000 soldiers against the Midianites. The army allegedly killed every adult Midianite male. This is in response to some of the Israelite men having had sex with some of the Midianite women. Moses then ordered them to slaughter in cold blood most of the captives, including all of the boys, while saving only female virgins. The latter were apparently to be retained for purposes of rape. The Midianite mothers were thus punished by having to watch their male children murdered in front of them. Then, they were themselves killed. Verse 35 talks about 32,000 virgin captives; this implies that there were probably about 32,000 boys killed.

    Fortunately, other passages in the Bible imply that the above genocide and mass murder never actually happened. If it did, then the entire Midian tribe would have been wiped out. All the males and many of the females had been killed. Any children that the female captives later had would not be regarded as Midianites. Yet, Judges 6:1 implies that in the course of a single lifetime, the Midianites went from being totally destroyed to becoming a nation once more. Further, they were strong enough to take the Israelite nation captive for 7 years.

  37. @Bones

    And once again the despiser of the word proves my point. I’d give up if I were you. You just digging deeper, and deeper and deeper into a pit of vileness

  38. Like I say Roundhead, you are a troll.

    Though you do seem angered and disgusted by those verses.

    Good luck living by those verses btw.

  39. “Sorry for being a confused liberal […]”.

    People can be broadly divided into two groups, Wazza: the saved and the unsaved. You are in the latter group (as are Bones and Greg also). So don’t flatter yourself, you are not a “confused liberal” at all – you are an object of God’s wrath, destined for the end that has been prepared for those of your ilk.

    But you keep on with your try-hard nonsense – you’ve probably got at least a few years to kill until your time comes, so you might as well spend it pretending to be clever.

  40. So Bones has discovered the severity of God, and wazza the mercy of God.

    Between them they may find something which resembles truth, eventually.

    Of course, Bones had to delve into the Old Testament for evidence of a severe God, so that he could deliver some ammunition to support his case for mercy.

    he completely forgets that Chrsitians do not, and have never been subjct to Old Testament laws or demands, and, in fact, are of faith and not law.

    He, and wazza, pretend some kind of New Testament legalism for those of us who are content to follow God’s instructions for sexual intercourse, marriage, filial relationships and fidelity.

    Wazza declares himself to be even more merciful than God by decreeing that decision making should be on the basis of empathy and sympathy, not on the foundation of Gods will and writ.

    He claims that he is no longer a legalist, but wants to bring in a revised, enforceable law of the land which allows his appeal to empathy and sympathy to create a new criminal class of people who take God at His Word, thus reversing the trend.

    Bons knows that he is well and truly outgunned by both Old and New Testament scripture on what marriage is and isn’t, so he embarks on a journey into the absurd to prove some point which is so far removed from marriage that I actually wonder if he has anything to say which is worth listening to.

    Wazza. Your friends lied to you. It wasn’t tumour they removed. It was your brain.

  41. Actually, I stated that Bones forgot that Christians are not subject to Old Testament law, but, on reflection, I don’t believe he did forget.

    I think he actually knows that we are no longer under law, but under grace, but is so keen to prove some long lost point that he’s prepared to forgo his own understanding of sound doctrine to make someone he can’t control look as unreasonable as possible, even resorting to fables if necessary.

    But does he have anything to say about what God says about marriage?

    Not a dicky bird.

    Not one scrap of evidence or even a hint of a verse or a concept or an idea from any of this trio of frauds. Only empathy and sympathy, misused scripture and humanist ideology.

  42. So, wazza, Bones, Greg, just for the sake of clarification, what does the New Testament tell us about what marriage is or isn’t?

    I ask, because after 240 comments on the other thread, and over 55 here, you still haven’t said one single thing about what you understand of Biblical marriage, what God says about it, and how it compares to proposed legislation.

    Since you claim to be Christians, that would surely be the starting point for your defence of homosexual marriage.

  43. @Steve

    They won’t give you an answer. They have no answer. They only have straw-man arguments, deflections, and abuse. It just proves how weak they are and how weak their position is.

  44. Hey Roundhead

    Did Israel kill all the Midianites (apart from the virgin daughters)?

    Hint : Numbers 31

    Simple yes/no answer.

  45. Hey, God-Despiser, not playing your games. Your attempts to throw unicorns in every direction to distract us won’t work.

  46. Well the answer is yes.

    Unfortunately though Judges 6 tells us

    The Israelites did evil in the eyes of the Lord, and for seven years he gave them into the hands of the Midianites. 2 Because the power of Midian was so oppressive, the Israelites prepared shelters for themselves in mountain clefts, caves and strongholds. 3 Whenever the Israelites planted their crops, the Midianites, Amalekites and other eastern peoples invaded the country.

    What the heck happened there.

    All the Midianites are destroyed then they’re invading Israel.

    Hmmm how can we explain that contradiction.

  47. ”@Greg, your Zac’s Place cult members may think that your humanist theology is AOK, but the weight of scripture has found your shallow, man-made theology wanting.”

    I have to declare, me old Roundhouse, that we have some very interesting conversations at Zac’s. Scripture is read, discussed and prayers said – all very cult-like.

    Catch you soon Greg.

  48. @Zeibart

    “Scripture is read, discussed and prayers said – all very cult-like.”

    Interesting. You do realise that the same happens at C3, which has been called a cult many times on this blog. Just sayin.

    Judging by the things that Greg is posting here, and the fact that he openly despises the bible,shows that either the teaching at Zac’s Place is really, really bad, or that Zac’s Place is a cult. I’d like to think that the first is the case, but I am not convinced just yet

  49. Well, it could be argued that a significant characteristic of a cult is that the views of a single man (or a close-knit circle of his) are the only acceptable or allowable ones. Any contravention incurs dismissal. That was my C3 experience overall.

    At Zac’s my experience is one where each can contribute without fear of condemnation or expulsion. Greg doesn’t teach in the ‘pastor’ sense, but facilitates input from those at the table. Revelation can come from anyone.

    You decide which is the cult.

  50. @Zeibart

    Your definition of a cult is certainly plausible in the context of many congregations in the world today. My experience with C3 differs greatly, however from yours.

    The danger lies with the idea that many voices contributing makes a congregation or church better than one where only a few experienced and qualified teachers contribute. The possibility of there being wrong teaching is greatly increased. Add to that the fact that interpretation of scripture is made by consensus rather than from learned authority, and you have a situation where incorrect doctrine can emerge and flourish. The fact that Greg is in a leadership role, regardless of whether he teaches in a “pastor” sense or not, proves to me that the congregation isn’t spiritually discerning at all, and by allowing a proven bible-hater to minister into their lives they are in danger of heading in a cultish direction. Zeibart, if you value your congregation at all, you must insist that Greg have his leadership position taken from him.

  51. Roundhose, I’m giving a message at church in a couple of weeks. You’re welcome to come and give me support.

  52. @God-despiser

    “Roundhose, I’m giving a message at church in a couple of weeks. You’re welcome to come and give me support.”

    Does your pastor know of your hatred for the bible?

  53. RH, I understand your take on this. Greg’s on-line persona is just that, but he has a heart for people in the 3D world. Also, we disagree on several fairly significant topics, but he’s still my brother.

  54. Your secondary point about how congregations learn is debatable. The foundational template for church life was several elders who would have shared the burden. Paul bemoaned the fact that so few had matured to the level that they could assume a teaching role. Furthermore, Acts 15 is a good example of church by consensus, followed by a summary by a respected senior individual.

    Single pastor/teachers can run riot with aberrant teaching too, and go unchecked in today’s ‘don’t touch God’s anointed’ church culture (in some quarters, not all).

  55. @Zeibart

    “Greg’s on-line persona is just that, but he has a heart for people in the 3D world. Also, we disagree on several fairly significant topics, but he’s still my brother.”

    Ok, but why the need for an arrogant, anti-biblical online persona? If he has a heart for people in the real world, why be such an a****hole online, especially when his screen name links to Zac’s Place? His online persona is not a good advertisement for it at all. In fact, after what Greg has written here, advertising himself as a representative of Zac’s Place, is it any wonder that I concluded that Zac’s Place is an unbiblical cult?

    Anyway, as I keep saying, the bible tells us that we shall know our brothers and sisters in Christ by their fruit, but all Greg shows is rottenness. I can only take your word that he is different in real life, but all of the evidence here on SP02 says the complete opposite

  56. ”Single pastor/teachers can run riot with aberrant teaching too” – the Pope for instance 😉

  57. ”If he has a heart for people in the real world, why be such an a****hole online,”

    Come over one Tuesday and ask him.

  58. @Zeibart

    “Single pastor/teachers can run riot with aberrant teaching too, and go unchecked in today’s ‘don’t touch God’s anointed’ church culture (in some quarters, not all).”

    I agree with that. There are certainly examples of this taking place. However, it’s the exception and not the norm. It is proven in many, many churches around the world however that a leadership made up of many differing voices and opinions more often than not leads to division, infighting and church splits. Obviously there are no perfect churches, but in my opinion and experience, a church with a strong leadership of two or three people means that wrong teaching from amongst, dare I say it, the unlearned congregation isn’t given voice.

  59. “Come over one Tuesday and ask him.”

    Too far away I’m afraid. Plus, if I was to actually meet him, I’d be very tempted to thump him!

  60. You did dare say it Roundhouse. That sort of statement wouldn’t have been out of place in 13th century medieval Catholicism. What do you think of the scripture in 1 Corinthians that says the Holy Spirit is our ultimate and true Teacher? If we don’t let the great unwashed become well-versed (literally) in the bible, we keep the laity and clergy forever divided. That is the worst divide in church life, not petty misunderstandings.

  61. ”I’d be very tempted to thump him!”

    Well, we do Christian Fight Club every third Tuesday. Bring your own towel. 🙂

  62. ”the unlearned congregation isn’t given voice.”

    So how, RH, does a priest carry out his duties if mute?

  63. @Zeibart

    “What do you think of the scripture in 1 Corinthians that says the Holy Spirit is our ultimate and true Teacher? ”

    I agree with you here. But we need to make sure that what we believe we are hearing from the Holy Spirit lines up with scripture. Scripture and the Holy Spirit always agree. If we are hearing something that disagrees with scripture then we are hearing from a spirit other than the Holy Spirit.

    “If we don’t let the great unwashed become well-versed (literally) in the bible, we keep the laity and clergy forever divided. That is the worst divide in church life, not petty misunderstandings.”

    I agree with this too. Please don’t misunderstand me. I am not saying that we shouldn’t allow other people to minister in church. But the laity need to be taught how to read the bible properly, otherwise they will stand up in church and spout the most ridiculous theology. I know because I’ve seen it. And how do they become well-versed? By being taught by others who are well-versed. If you have leadership who have interpreted scripture incorrectly then that flows on down into the rest of the congregation. And this is my point about Zac’s Place. By giving a self-confessed unbeliever in scripture a platform or a position of being able to speak into people’s lives, you create a church where the truth is exchanged for a lie.

  64. There is always that danger, in any congregation RH, and I am constantly alive to it. But my views and those I hear are moderated and evolve under the light of scriptural study and conversation. Zac’s Place is not a one-man band and my contribution is heard, as are others. One thesis gets countered and alternative interpretations expressed. Overall, the less learned become more so, and relationships deepen.

  65. Interesting parting shots, Greg.

    The fact is that I have produced enough accurate Biblical information to defend the concept of marriage against homosexual changes, and that really irks you, Bones and wazza.

    If you didn’t care about what I have said you would not have commented so vehemently. Your put downs are not an indication of indifference. Both you and Bones have been rude and obnoxious. Wzza has been the essence of sarcasm which is universally considered the lowest form of wit.

    You call it humour, I call it insane logic, since the arguments it was based on were nothing to do with the discussion at hand, merely unrelated diversions which skirt every issue demanded of you.

    You have made it clear that you have no respect for the Word, nor do you believe that the Bible contains God’s Word.

    On that basis, then, we have no argument, because, as I have repeatedly said, you speak only from a secular sense, in which case you are absolutely correct, there is no reason why homosexuals shouldn’t be accorded marriage ‘equality’, which was entirely the argument of Peter Saunders on the other thread, who added that, by the same token, there was an even stronger case for polygamous marriage.

    So, not only do you misrepresent the argument I made, you also insult both my intelligence and my ability to rightly divide the Word, the very Word which you say is not the Word.

    If my intelligence is an issue then why spend so much time trying to assail it? In fact it is not in dispute since you claim to be able to exactly understand my perspective and to refute my logic, which indicates a logical approach to what I have said, but I counter your claims, since you have hitherto failed utterly to address the most significant issues with anything but slander and innuendo mixed with wrong doctrinal logic and exegesis.

    What’s it to be, Greg? The Word is the Word, or the Word is not the Word. If it is not, to you, the Word of God, then by what reason do you claim that I, who do believe it is the Word of God, am unable to rightly divide the Word?

    In fact my doctrinal presentation of what marriage is can only be accurate to Christ’s words, since I have directly quoted him. I have presented the case against homosexual sex as anything less than sin, and therefore the reason for its exclusion from any marriage contract involving God.

    But since you openly deny the Word, you have no recourse to it, and that is why you have no judgement to make regarding either my intelligence of Biblical accuracy.

    You have no say in it whatsoever. You have no voice in it. You have no opinion on it, simply because you do not believe in its authenticity.

    And I can, to a lesser degree, apply the same conditions on Bones, who has made the same argument at other times, despite his erroneous appeal to Old Testament cherry-picking technics. You speak of irony. I think it ironic that Bones, who has always been one of the chorus of disapproval about perceived Pentecostal inadequacies in the Word, would stoop to such levels to attempt to prove his mute points.

    But thanks for letting me post here, Greg. I appreciate the opportunity.

  66. So, wazza, Bones, Greg, just for the sake of clarification, what does the New Testament tell us about what marriage is or isn’t?

    I ask, because after 240 comments on the other thread, and over 60 here, you still haven’t said one single thing about what you understand of Biblical marriage, what God says about it, and how it compares to proposed legislation.

    Since you claim to be Christians, that would surely be the starting point for your defence of homosexual marriage.

  67. @Greg

    “You can’t tell when bones wazza or myself are using irony, sarcasm or other rhetorical devices in our debate” and then “were you ever to actually meet me, I doubt you’d be remotely tempted to do that…especially if you use words like thump!”

    And neither can you princess! Oh, and I love the way you apologise for name calling and then say this – “By the way squarehead (roundhouse) I am not a self confessed un believer…I am a confessed believer…I just don’t believe your horse shit.”

    Bye bye Greg. Looking forward to not reading your stuff

  68. Greg I hope you keep on posting articles or maybe give me some posting rights. I’ll be buggered if I’m going to waste my time reading Steve’s self opinionated crap.

  69. I’ll tell you, what, Bones. You, wazza and Greg can have it all to yourselves, if you want. Put up what you want. Liberalise the world, mate.

    Just check through the threads and remember who it has been who has been throwing around the majority of the ugly insults when you next take communion!

    It’s all yours…

  70. “You must understand that our civilization is so vast that we can’t have our minorities upset and stirred. Ask yourself, what do we want in this country, above all? People want to be happy, isn’t that right? …

    “Colored people don’t like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don’t feel good about Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Burn it. Someone’s written a book on tobacco and cancer of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping? Burn the book. Serenity, Montag. Peace, Montag. Take your fight outside. Better yet, into the incinerator….

    “If you don’t want a man unhappy politically, don’t give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none…”

    Ray Bradbury
    Fahrenheit 451

Comments are closed.