Kim Davis - The Christian Rosa Parks

[Catatonic]

Pretty pompous statement for having a finite mind.

I totally disagree!
Studies have shown that the more finite the mind, the more pompous the statements.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

And after centralizing so much in Washington, how has that worked out for us? State capitals are little better.

Perhaps you're right.
I'd be just as willing to go in the other direction.

The local government has clearly failed also, paying her $80,000 a year to file paperwork that is completely unnecessary in the first place.... a job she arguably only has because her mother hired her and paid her more than her coworkers without merit. Then she was elected to her mother's vacated seat based on the experience she received from that nepotism.

Which inevitably takes us back to the best solution, get the government out of the business altogether.
Maybe the best solution is the only solution.

 

[Jones]

Job sounds like a sinecure really. Inheriting a government position from your mother? I smell some home cooking.

 

[Harry Manback]

This is a common misconception when it comes to this issue. Hating someone because they are genetically different from yourself is short sighted and stupid which is where Wallace went wrong. What we know today is that there is no genetic difference between a gay or straight person, but that the gay person suffers from a mental deficiency that drives them to be gay for unexplained reasons. If more time was spent trying to help these people rather than promoting their disorder society would be much better off.

I read this post and wondered...

Who really needs "help"?

#Primeval

 

[bottomups]

Pretty pompous statement for having a finite mind.

Back in 5th grade, while attending a catholic school, I got into lots of conversations with the parish priest. One day I asked him, "If creation is true and Adam & Eve started the human race and both were caucasian, then where did all these different races come from"? He couldn't answer my question and have believed in evolution ever since.

 

[FrigidFTSup]

Congress passed a law allowing states to define marriage. Kentucky residents passed a constitutional amendment by 75% of the popular vote definIng marriage as union between a man and a woman. So the Supreme Court is squashing the will of hundreds of thousands, maybe millions if citizens? Something here isn't right.

A law in Kentucky shouldn't hold us back centuries.

so if federal "law of the land" rule the world... how does the recreational pot use still happen within states where the federal says no?

The executive branch chooses what to enforce. There have been problems in some of the states that have legalized pot in regards to the Federal Government. Some dispensaries have been raided and many of the businesses can't get financial support such as loans because banks are afraid what the feds will do.

I just don't understand how a same sex marriage is any kind of threat to mine.

It isn't. Some people just don't want to explain it to their kids.

This is correct, but was it the right thing to do? Most homosexuals I come across are not balanced individuals. Many have deep emotional problems, are extremely impulsive, and generally don't conduct themselves the way you would believe a balanced individual would. Couple this with the fact that there is no evidence that homosexuality is genetic and you have only one possibility left, and that is a mental disorder. I think the homosexual community as a whole would benefit from it being relisted as a mental illness.

There is overwhelming evidence it is genetic. And to say they are troubled is insanity. The average homosexual couple earns more than the average straight couple. 94,000 vs 86,000. The average homosexual is also more educated than the average straight person. 46% of those who identify as gay hold a college degree. While only 33% of straight people have a college degree. No balance huh?

This country is nearly 80% Christian and a Christian value is to love the sinner and hate the sin. As a majority Christian nation it is perfectly natural to reject gay marriage due to the sin of homosexuality, while loving those who are homosexual by getting them the mental and spiritual help they so desperately need.

You aren't loving the "sinner" by calling saying they are mentally unstable. Practice what you preach.

but to hand a homosexual couple a marriage license is endorsing the sin the couple is participating

I don't think we should be supporting planned parenthood, am I endorsing them by paying taxes?

Most of the world of psychology is based on voodoo science anyway dreamed up by a man high on cocaine

So what is it like being stuck in 1948?

The laws Rosa Parks was subject to were fundamentally wrong, just like the legalization of gay marriage without any respect to religious freedom

What religious freedom is restricted by letting gays marry? You're fundamentally wrong by preventing two people who love each other from getting married. Do you think they will magically stop being gay because they can't get married?

Am I the only one who's wondering how long Rowan county, (the county she works for), will allow her to sit in jail before the county decides to begin the process of firing her for not being at work?

She's an elected official. Plenty of them are in jail.

I support decisions by the Supreme Court when there is a valid constitutional reference to their final decision. Last I checked the words "gay marriage" never appear in the Constitution making the issue a state issue, not a federal one. Heller vs. DC was a no brainer as the words are written in black in white that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.

Selective reading on your part.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It's in black and white that the right to bear arms should not be infringed in regards to militias. No where in there does it mention private citizens. And you're right, gay isn't mentioned in the constitution. But neither is spying on private citizens, but that is illegal based on a constitutional analysis. If you take the constitution at face value you're limiting your own freedoms. It's a broad document.

Some homosexual radicals are going as far to demand the church remove these writings from the bible altogether because it hurts their little brains to read that what they practice is viewed nearly on par with that of worshiping Satan, but that is for a whole other matter to discuss.

Again you're spreading hate saying gays have little brains. Not very Christian like.

Back in 5th grade, while attending a catholic school, I got into lots of conversations with the parish priest. One day I asked him, "If creation is true and Adam & Eve started the human race and both were caucasian, then where did all these different races come from"? He couldn't answer my question and have believed in evolution ever since.

I went to 12 years of Catholic school. I was never taught anything but evolution.

 

[brett636]

Kim Davis was using her tax-payer funded position in government to impose her religious beliefs on others and deny them their rights.

Comparisons to Rosa Parks are absurd, as is your insistence that homosexuality is a mental illness - I think you are the one with a pathology.

This is why leftists can never be allowed any sort of real political power. They can't accept opinions other than their own, and anyone with a differing opinion must be shut down and or silenced. I've watched people with prominent careers have to completely rearrange their lives because they made a statement or donation to a group that doesn't tow the "it's ok to be gay" line. When I've made these arguments on Facebook and elsewhere people who didn't have the intellectual firepower to argue against my points made it abundantly clear they were looking into who I was and where I worked to use my income as a means to shut me up. Well I refuse to be silenced on this matter. I don't give a damn about public opinion, widely held beliefs despite how flawed they are, or a small group of stuck up psychologists trying to make people feel better about their condition by not referring to it as such. I look for the most logical reason the world is the way it is and if you or those who think like you disagree with me then so be it.

 

[The Other Side]

 

[The Other Side]

This is why leftists can never be allowed any sort of real political power. They can't accept opinions other than their own, and anyone with a differing opinion must be shut down and or silenced. I've watched people with prominent careers have to completely rearrange their lives because they made a statement or donation to a group that doesn't tow the "it's ok to be gay" line. When I've made these arguments on Facebook and elsewhere people who didn't have the intellectual firepower to argue against my points made it abundantly clear they were looking into who I was and where I worked to use my income as a means to shut me up. Well I refuse to be silenced on this matter. I don't give a damn about public opinion, widely held beliefs despite how flawed they are, or a small group of stuck up psychologists trying to make people feel better about their condition by not referring to it as such. I look for the most logical reason the world is the way it is and if you or those who think like you disagree with me then so be it.

I cant wait for one of your offspring to end up gay.

That day will be hilarious.

TOS.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

I cant wait for one of your offspring to end up gay.

That day will be hilarious.

TOS.

He's a walking caricature of the drunk uncle at Thanksgiving dinner that no one bothers to tell to shut up.
He gives everyone plenty to laugh about afterwards, so we just let him ramble incoherently.

 

[Jones]

 

[soberups]

This is a common misconception regarding modern Christianity. Christianity, as we now practice it, is based on the New Testament, while nearly everything you just highlighted are in the old testament.

So let me get this straight.

Are you saying that the way we practice Christianity has actually evolved and changed over the years? Are you saying that the portions of the Bible that we consider relevant have changed over the years?

I don't understand. I thought the Bible...the whole Bible.... was the Word of God. Now you are saying that there are parts of it....like the passages about putting menstruating women in the back yard for a week or stoning teen girls to death for losing their virginity....that no longer apply to "modern" Christianity. I just want to know who it was that conveniently decided that the Old Testament was no longer applicable but the New Testament ( at least most of it) was still important for us to follow.

And what did Jesus say about gay people?

 

[moreluck]

And Sandra Fluke is treated like a hero......???

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

The one point that has not been mentioned yet is that the marriage licenses issued by the deputy clerks are not signed and therefore may or may not be valid. The judge even conceded that the licenses may not be valid as they are supposed to be signed by the country clerk only.

 

[10 point]

I just want to know who it was that conveniently decided that the Old Testament was no longer applicable but the New Testament ( at least most of it) was still important for us to follow?

What happened when the woman caught in adultry was brought before Jesus?
She was no doubt begging for mercy because the leaders were going to stone her.

So Jesus said that He forgave her and what else did He say?

Go and sin no more.

He didn't say sexual sin was ok. He told her to stop doing it from that moment forward and that applies to every form of sexual sin and sins of any other issue.

He basically said "stop doing it" so I can say that Jesus did not approve of what the Law condemns.
He said He came to fulfill the Law and that was the trap that they tried to catch Him in.

It's your choice to believe or not to. The Bible says that. And also that there will be a reckoning for what we did, didn't do, and propagated while we were alive.

And the assumptions, theories, lies, hopes, and faith will meet eternity when our last breath is taken.
That will personally settle all conjecture for every person...
forever.

 

[iowa boy]

The one point that has not been mentioned yet is that the marriage licenses issued by the deputy clerks are not signed and therefore may or may not be valid. The judge even conceded that the licenses may not be valid as they are supposed to be signed by the country clerk only.

Upstate,

I found this online after doing some reading about this topic last night.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Upstate,

I found this online after doing some reading about this topic last night.

From what I read in the paper the county judge is not issuing the licenses----they are being issued by the deputy clerks unsigned.

 

[wkmac]

What happened when the woman caught in adultry was brought before Jesus?
She was no doubt begging for mercy because the leaders were going to stone her.

So Jesus said that He forgave her and what else did He say?

Go and sin no more.

He didn't say sexual sin was ok. He told her to stop doing it from that moment forward and that applies to every form of sexual sin and sins of any other issue.

He basically said "stop doing it" so I can say that Jesus did not approve of what the Law condemns.
He said He came to fulfill the Law and that was the trap that they tried to catch Him in.

It's your choice to believe or not to. The Bible says that. And also that there will be a reckoning for what we did, didn't do, and propagated while we were alive.

And the assumptions, theories, lies, hopes, and faith will meet eternity when our last breath is taken.
That will personally settle all conjecture for every person...
forever.

Was and still is one of my favorite passages in the NT but these events may well have never occurred at all.

The earliest textual appearance of this account only found in John Chapter 8 and no other gospel did not occur until the late 4th/early 5th century when it first arrives on the scene as found in the Codex Bezae which is a greek/latin text. The latin would obviously suggest these are latter written copies and translated/copied from earlier sources(?), however no sources are noted nor suggested to my present knowledge. Nor do they match to earlier known accounts found from the Gospel of John. The actual original Codex Bezae is found and solely possessed at the Cambridge University Library. This codex contains most of the 4 gospel accounts and the Book of Acts. No Pauline texts or anything else to my knowledge. The Codex Bezae account of John 8:1-12 dates to nearly 500 years after they occur and as beautiful a story as it is, it does raise doubt about their accuracy.

The earliest complete manuscripts of the whole bible, or what we think of as the bible, we actually have dates to the 4th century and are Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus and neither contain this account. Codex Sinaiticus thanks to the British Museum along with other parties is online for research purposes and the Gospel of John in Sinaiticus begins at verse 12 and concludes with verse 59. 1 thru 11 are missing entirely which is the adultress woman story.

Codex Sinaiticus can be found here and they briefly explain its place in history, what the codex consists of and then to your upper right where you see "Go To" is a drop down list under the word (Book) which displays the texts for each book in the bible as found in the codex. There is a photo copy of the actual text and to your right is an actual text reproduction and below that if there is a translation, an english translation of the text.

Now for some argument in support of the Adultress Woman story found in John 8.

Papias of Hierapolis, 70-163 AD/CE (pick your poison) was an apostolic father, Bishop of Hierapolis in what is now Pamukkale Turkey. It is suggested that in 125 CE that Papias recorded in the Gospel of the Hebrews (not the NT Book of Hebrews) an account of a woman accused of many sins and forgiven by Jesus. Gospel of the Hebrews is a syncretic Jewish-Christian text that of what exists is a collection of quotations of early christian fathers and we only have fragments of the early texts, Papias quotes being among them. Gospel of Hebrews like so many texts were rejected as canonical by the Constantine era and post Constantine orthodoxy but are still of value for understanding the greater historical context.

The next text to suggest the Adultress story is found in Didascalia Apostolorum, a christian treatise asserted to be Church Orders. It is claimed these were written by the Twelve Apostles and presented to the Jerusalem Council circa 50 CE however scholars generally agree the texts as we have them today were written around 230 CE likely by an unknown bishop and geographically source from Syria around Antioch. This text does include a quotation of an adultress type story but it does not quote John's Gospel or for that matter, any source at all.

And the last evidence in support of the adultress story, A late 4th century treatise of Church Orders, "Constitutions of the Holy Apostles" contains the following quote in relation to the adultress story.

“And when the elders had set another woman who had sinned before Him, and had left the sentence to Him, and were gone out, our Lord, the Searcher of the hearts, inquiring of her whether the elders had condemned her, and being answered No, He said unto her: “Go thy way therefore, for neither do I condemn thee.”

This text is found in Book II.24 and I have to say when I first read it, what jumped out at me was when I read the first 13 words, my first thought was, "wait, how many time did the elders play this game with Jesus" as the suggestion of "another woman" suggests there were many. To my knowledge there is only the story of the one but I can just see Jesus face palming and saying, "oh come on, not again!"

The Constitution of the Holy Apostles dates to 375-380 CE and is believed to source back to Northern Syria around Antioch. Author is unknown but there are suggestions the author was the 4th century Eunomian Bishop Julian of Cillicia.

Until the mid 20th century, it was thought that no early church father had ever made note of the famous adultress passage but then in 1941' a discovery in Egypt included the writings of Didymus the Blind (313-398 CE) which suggested the story being in writings known to exist in Alexandria. Codex Vaticanus (4th century CE) which sources from Alexandria contain an umlaut (a special mark) at the end of John chapter 7 which suggests an alternative reading is known to exist. What that reading is or what it sez we don't know nor do we know if this suggests the missing text of John 8:1-11, the adultress story not found in Vaticanus does indeed exist in other texts dating to much older sources.

There is much more to this story historically speaking on both sides of the debates but this gives a general outline of the problem and I think IMO a good lesson as to not being so quick to be dogmatic about a biblical text and the weight of being authentic to its suggested or alleged claim. The truth is, we have no original text hand written by any apostle, prophet, partriarch or other messenger of god. At best we have a claim of written from a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy............ That's the best we have folks and you can sit back, take it all on faith (as so many well meaning folk do) or you can try and noodle out for yourself and see what comes up. Even if you conclude John 8:1-11 is not authentic to the claim, it's still a beautiful story about forgiveness and still has value to make humanity better. But to me it raises a deeper fundamental question, if the text wasn't original, why would 4th century christian thinkers and later dare abandon the harsh OT dictums in the first place for a story they likely knew as untrue? Apologistic literalists would right there use that as evidence for the story being real because why would an early christian dare to tempt god by messing with his law? I know because I tired to rationalize it that way at one time but studying historical christianity much much deeper, specifically the neo-platonist gnostic christian fathers and writers and the weight of evidence to support my earlier thinking just didn't hold up.

When you learn about the early gnostic traditions and the OT god as the neo-platonic demiurge, you start seeing those influences although almost literally crushed by latter orthodoxy, their finger prints still emerge from the past even from orthodox texts. Modern christians who often argue the OT doesn't apply, has been done away with often don't realize these are gnostic arguments likely echoes from early chrisitan fathers like Marcion of Sinope who argued the OT and the OT god no longer mattered as Jesus was now our god. And since we looked at the adultress account in the Gospel of John, it is worth noting that John's gospel is often considered far more than the other 3 or the Book of Acts as a very gnostic influenced gospel and the more I read it and learn of the gnostics, the more its gnostic influences leap from its pages. Thus I can clearly see the adultress story as gnostic and likely the origins of its source.

So for those of you who attended the BC church on Sunday Morning instead of getting your sorry butt up and down to your own local church, there is the historical sermon of the day. Take it, leave it, ignore it, condemn it because at the end of the day it will not judge you nor condemn you to an eternity of damnation.

 

[The Other Side]

A law in Kentucky shouldn't hold us back centuries.


The executive branch chooses what to enforce. There have been problems in some of the states that have legalized pot in regards to the Federal Government. Some dispensaries have been raided and many of the businesses can't get financial support such as loans because banks are afraid what the feds will do.

It isn't. Some people just don't want to explain it to their kids.

There is overwhelming evidence it is genetic. And to say they are troubled is insanity. The average homosexual couple earns more than the average straight couple. 94,000 vs 86,000. The average homosexual is also more educated than the average straight person. 46% of those who identify as gay hold a college degree. While only 33% of straight people have a college degree. No balance huh?

You aren't loving the "sinner" by calling saying they are mentally unstable. Practice what you preach.

I don't think we should be supporting planned parenthood, am I endorsing them by paying taxes?

So what is it like being stuck in 1948?

What religious freedom is restricted by letting gays marry? You're fundamentally wrong by preventing two people who love each other from getting married. Do you think they will magically stop being gay because they can't get married?

She's an elected official. Plenty of them are in jail.

Selective reading on your part.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It's in black and white that the right to bear arms should not be infringed in regards to militias. No where in there does it mention private citizens. And you're right, gay isn't mentioned in the constitution. But neither is spying on private citizens, but that is illegal based on a constitutional analysis. If you take the constitution at face value you're limiting your own freedoms. It's a broad document.

Again you're spreading hate saying gays have little brains. Not very Christian like.

I went to 12 years of Catholic school. I was never taught anything but evolution.

Excellent post.

TOS.

 

[The Other Side]

What happened when the woman caught in adultry was brought before Jesus?
She was no doubt begging for mercy because the leaders were going to stone her.

So Jesus said that He forgave her and what else did He say?

Go and sin no more.

He didn't say sexual sin was ok. He told her to stop doing it from that moment forward and that applies to every form of sexual sin and sins of any other issue.

He basically said "stop doing it" so I can say that Jesus did not approve of what the Law condemns.
He said He came to fulfill the Law and that was the trap that they tried to catch Him in.

It's your choice to believe or not to. The Bible says that. And also that there will be a reckoning for what we did, didn't do, and propagated while we were alive.

And the assumptions, theories, lies, hopes, and faith will meet eternity when our last breath is taken.
That will personally settle all conjecture for every person...
forever.

I have a question for you 10 point.

If mankind was wiped out, and all written historical evidence of ALL kinds were destroyed with nothing in print remaining, and all structures destroyed, including ALL churches, along with all past religious monuments ( like pyramids, rome, the vatican, etc etc)

And a future people came to earth.

Which would they be able to prove existed previously??

RELIGION or SCIENCE?

TOS.