Devils Advocate wrote:

LJ wrote:

Devils Advocate wrote: OK..... But my reading comprehension appears to better than yours. If the Catholic Church wrote the New Testament and you believe that this part of the Bible is correct, then you believe in part the the RCC has got it right. Most sects of Christianity have evolved from the Cathloic Church.

umm, canonization occured after the new testament was written.

Yes but some of the Dead Sea scrolls were omitted.

1. The dead sea scrolls were not known about at the time of the Council of Nicea. They were discovered in the 1940s/50s.

2. Only parts of the scrolls were even part of the Jewish Bible or "New Testament". There were plenty other scrolls that were collections of non-Jewish writings and religious thoughts from other cultures in the region (like the War Scroll). Only about 40% of them were even "Biblical" manuscripts (old or new testament). 30% were from other cultures other than Jews, and the remaining 30% were "non-canonical" old testament scrolls like another "Psalms" that the Jews at the time knew about but didn't believe to be of David/Solomon so they omitted in their own Bible.

You act like the Council of Nicea had copies of the "dead sea scrolls", the scrolls were 100% written by Jews and Jesus' followers, and the Council decided to leave parts out.

None of that is true, only parts were even Jewish/followers of Christ, and the scrolls weren't known to exist at the time of the Council.

So please, do some research instead of just throwing one liners out there that have nothing to do with what you are trying to insinuate.


personal attacks removed-LJ

Regarding the article: Don't believe everything that you read, or in this case---everything that you didn't read.

DA just got owned on this thread.

I Wear Pants wrote:

I am not a Huckabee fan, but good Lord that is the funniest/best political ad in the history of politics!

I Wear Pants wrote:

GAWD! What next???

To be honest I would have rather had Huckabee on the ballot than Mccain in 2008. And I would definitely rather have had him than Palin as VP to Mccain.

FairwoodKing wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote:

GAWD! What next???

Admit it, it's awesome.

Ha I dont think the post creator gets the article. Huckabee did use some horrible analogies but what he was saying is we shouldnt accomodate every single group of people with a gripe like this when the vast majority disapprove

Classyposter58 wrote: Ha I dont think the post creator gets the article. Huckabee did use some horrible analogies but what he was saying is we shouldnt accomodate every single group of people with a gripe like this when the vast majority disapprove

Using that same train of thought, the Germans were right in sending the Jews to concentration camps since the majority didn't like them.

FairwoodKing wrote:

Classyposter58 wrote: Ha I dont think the post creator gets the article. Huckabee did use some horrible analogies but what he was saying is we shouldnt accomodate every single group of people with a gripe like this when the vast majority disapprove

Using that same train of thought, the Germans were right in sending the Jews to concentration camps since the majority didn't like them.

HAHA. Are you really trying to compare gays in the US to Jews during the Nazi Germany era?

Darkon wrote:

FairwoodKing wrote:

Classyposter58 wrote: Ha I dont think the post creator gets the article. Huckabee did use some horrible analogies but what he was saying is we shouldnt accomodate every single group of people with a gripe like this when the vast majority disapprove

Using that same train of thought, the Germans were right in sending the Jews to concentration camps since the majority didn't like them.

HAHA. Are you really trying to compare gays in the US to Jews during the Nazi Germany era?

Why not? There were 100,000 gays and lesbians in those concentration camps, too. The Nazis made gay men wear pink triangles. That's where the gay symbol came from.

I'm only saying that in a democracy, the rights of minorities are supposed to be protected.

FairwoodKing wrote:

Classyposter58 wrote: Ha I dont think the post creator gets the article. Huckabee did use some horrible analogies but what he was saying is we shouldnt accomodate every single group of people with a gripe like this when the vast majority disapprove

Using that same train of thought, the Germans were right in sending the Jews to concentration camps since the majority didn't like them.

Huckabee wasn't talking about not liking gays in the part of the article we're debating.

He was trying, rather poorly, to say that once we start changing the definition of marriage where does it stop? Do we then have to allow polygamists to marry because they wish to? Etc, etc.

It's a stupid comparison and I think it's stupid to even worry about who gets married and such (though no church/organization should be forced to marry gays should they object to it).

I Wear Pants wrote:

FairwoodKing wrote:

Classyposter58 wrote: Ha I dont think the post creator gets the article. Huckabee did use some horrible analogies but what he was saying is we shouldnt accomodate every single group of people with a gripe like this when the vast majority disapprove

Using that same train of thought, the Germans were right in sending the Jews to concentration camps since the majority didn't like them.

Huckabee wasn't talking about not liking gays in the part of the article we're debating.

He was trying, rather poorly, to say that once we start changing the definition of marriage where does it stop? Do we then have to allow polygamists to marry because they wish to? Etc, etc.

It's a stupid comparison and I think it's stupid to even worry about who gets married and such (though no church/organization should be forced to marry gays should they object to it).

Just to set the record straight, nowhere in the gay movement is there an attempt to coerce any church to perform gay marriages. It is the huge body of legal rights within marriage that we are concerned about.

I know that. I was just saying that should remain the idea. Gay people should be entitled the same legal and financial rights and incentives that go along with marriage as straight couples. IMO.