jdm56 Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Max, My reference to Pompei and Herculaneum was of course about their destruction by the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in about 79A.D. The ruins that have been excavated, of Pompei at least, would indicate the city was basically a "den of iniquity" to use a biblical term. And they met a similar fate to that of the "cities of the plain", Sodom and Gomorrah, as related in the O.T. Of course, a non-believer would dismiss all these calamities as being mere chance, or fate. I don't. Jesus spoke and calmed the sea. God parted the Red Sea. IOW, God can and does intervene in the natural world. BTW, homosexuality is addressed in the N.T. - Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust toward one another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. I imagine you're right, though Max. We'll probably have to agree to disagree on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm56 Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Woodog, I'm sorry to hear of the difficulties you've had dealing with this problem. And I'm even more sorry, that you were temporarily deceived by so-called Christian organizations a couple of times. But I am glad that you realize you were decived by them. Merely reciting the "sinner's prayer" (whatever that is supposed to be) will not save anyone. Salvation comes thru repentence, which according to the bible is defined as a Godly sorrow, and, having a broken heart and a contrite spirit. IOW, salvation is real, it is a new birth, a spiritual birth. It is not a change of mind, a profession of faith, or merely joining a so-called church. It is a real experience between you and God, one that only you can truly know. It is something you experience and can then testify of and witness to. How can one testify of a decision? And even after one is saved (born again) temptations will still come. After all, salvation is of the soul, but we're still living in the flesh. In fact, I've heard it put this way a number of times - When we are saved, satan can't get your soul, but he still want's your life, your influence. So he will continue to try and cause a Christian to fall, to sin. And without a doubt, we ALL sin and fall far short of the glory of God. Even after salvation. Because we are a two-fold being - spiritual and carnal. And that outward, carnal person will have to struggle against sin the rest of their life, which is why He commanded the saved to offer our lives as a living sacrifice. That is the sacrifice, to fight against and not surrender to sin; to live for God. Sincerely, JDMccall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwatkins Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 ---------------- On 3/5/2004 4:36:55 PM James D McCall wrote: Max, My reference to Pompei and Herculaneum was of course about their destruction by the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in about 79A.D. The ruins that have been excavated, of Pompei at least, would indicate the city was basically a "den of iniquity" to use a biblical term. And they met a similar fate to that of the "cities of the plain", Sodom and Gomorrah, as related in the O.T. Of course, a non-believer would dismiss all these calamities as being mere chance, or fate. I don't. Jesus spoke and calmed the sea. God parted the Red Sea. IOW, God can and does intervene in the natural world. ---------------- James - I acknowledge and to some degree admire your conviction to your faith. However, the logic you state above becomes rather interesting and, to me, a path I can't follow. Under those rules, all calamities are to punish the morally (under God's terms) decadent and the colateral death of the morally OK is an accepted fallout of the larger solution. It is too much akin to the dissatisfied postal worker armed with an AK47 going to kill their supervisor - yeah, a few innocent people may die but they'll get the one they were after. I'll have to join the list to agree to disagree. As to homosexuality - geesh, I really can't imagine what it would be like if heterosexuality was illegal. I cannot develop a sensible argument that tells me homosexuality is wrong. I know it is wrong for me - but so is Hawaiian prints, green bell peppers, Rap music, Bose speakers and manual labor. Unfortunately those things are yet to be outlawed - but I may start a campaign... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm56 Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Henry, I would not equate God's righteous judgment to that of a disgruntled postal worker. Also, I've not said anything about making homosexuality illegal. But that doesn't mean I think the 5000+ yr. old definition of marriage should be changed, either! The institution of marriage is so ingrained in religious and social traditions, it's hard to tell where one starts and the other stops. It's almost like it would be impossible to sort out what is a religious tenet, and what is a legal one. But as a Christian, I believe God established two institutions in the world; the Church and the family. Christ is the head of the church. The church is called the bride of Christ. And in the family, the man is the head of the woman. This is God's law, not mine. At which point the opposition will be quick to point out I am injecting religious dogma into what is a legal or social topic. To which I can only reiterate that, like it or not, this nation was founded upon these Christian values. And in the time these documents were penned, do you think the question of homosexual marriage was even uttered? Of course, not. But due to man's continuing moral degeneration, now some 230 years later, that is where we are. We're tearing down, one by one, the moral foundations of this great nation. Anyone feeling the ground tremble? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwatkins Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 ---------------- On 3/5/2004 5:50:25 PM James D McCall wrote: Henry, I would not equate God's righteous judgment to that of a disgruntled postal worker. <>> Also, I've not said anything about making homosexuality illegal. But that doesn't mean I think the 5000+ yr. old definition of marriage should be changed, either! The institution of marriage is so ingrained in religious and social traditions, it's hard to tell where one starts and the other stops. It's almost like it would be impossible to sort out what is a religious tenet, and what is a legal one. But as a Christian, I believe God established two institutions in the world; the Church and the family. Christ is the head of the church. The church is called the bride of Christ. And in the family, the man is the head of the woman. This is God's law, not mine. << >> At which point the opposition will be quick to point out I am injecting religious dogma into what is a legal or social topic. To which I can only reiterate that, like it or not, this nation was founded upon these Christian values. And in the time these documents were penned, do you think the question of homosexual marriage was even uttered? Of course, not. But due to man's continuing moral degeneration, now some 230 years later, that is where we are. We're tearing down, one by one, the moral foundations of this great nation. Anyone feeling the ground tremble? <<< Well I was fine until the moral degeneration thingy. That is truly a matter of opinion of the facts - your position trivializes the moral transgressions of our forefathers. Strong morally wrong issues for me included - the owning of other humans, the required silence of women, the restriction of voice (vote) by gender, the restriction of vote by land ownership, the federalistic will of the wealthy. In my view of things these issues are far greater crimes than willful prostitution, open nudity, homosexuality, coarse language and the other things I hear criticized in modern society. Granted, taking of arms in a wild west fashion to settle differences is a step backwords, but on an overall morality stance we ain't near as bad as painted (IMHO)>>> ---------------- My thoughts above are in <[< >]>>. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm56 Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 ---------------- On 3/5/2004 7:06:57 PM hwatkins wrote: <[< Well I was fine until the moral degeneration thingy. That is truly a matter of opinion of the facts - your position trivializes the moral transgressions of our forefathers. Strong morally wrong issues for me included - the owning of other humans, the required silence of women, the restriction of voice (vote) by gender, the restriction of vote by land ownership, the federalistic will of the wealthy. In my view of things these issues are far greater crimes than willful prostitution, open nudity, homosexuality, coarse language and the other things I hear criticized in modern society. Granted, taking of arms in a wild west fashion to settle differences is a step backwords, but on an overall morality stance we ain't near as bad as painted (IMHO)>]> ---------------- My thoughts above are in <[[ >]]>. ---------------- Henry, OK, I want to hit these one at a time: Is slavery a moral issue? I think that is debatable. I'm not saying it is good or right by any means, in fact I think forced slavery is one of the most horrible institutions man has ever concocted, but I just don't know that strictly speaking, it is a moral issue. It certainly has no place in a democracy where individual liberty is valued, though. When were women required to be silent? In America? Maybe you're referring to the N.T. scripture that admonishes women to keep silent in the church and not to usurp mens authority. Kids are required to be silent in classrooms all around the world. Is that immoral? Voting - I don't see this as a moral issue either, but instead as a social issue. As for the "federalistic will of the wealthy", well that's just the way of the world, isn't it. At all times and in all lands, "them what's got get's more". Again, I don't see that as a moral issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt1stcav Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 Why don't people just mind their own business and stop meddling in other people's affairs? What law-abiding, consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes behind closed doors should not matter to anyone else, period! Don't try to convert me or preach to me on how I should live my own life...as long as I'm not hurting others, it should not be anyone else's concern. That's how I feel. I'm straight; my brother is gay. That's the way we were born. So what? Our family is Roman Catholic, and my folks didn't disown my brother once he "came out of the closet" (I hate that term)! They don't understand his lifestyle, but they still love him and respect him and are proud to be his parents, despite what the Bible may say about homosexuality! He is what he is, and he cannot flip a switch and automatically become straight again (by living a lie and be miserable trying to fit into what is considered society's norms), just like I can't flip a switch and become gay! Accept the fact that all people are different, and that no one's perfect, and move on! End of rant... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt1stcav Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 By the way, my gay brother just bought a pair of mint 1993 Klipsch KG 3.2 loudspeakers, and may possibly buy another tube amp for them (he owned a JoLida JD 202a last year, but sold it). Will he be accepted into the Klipsch Forums if he so chooses to become a member, or will he be ostracized just because he's gay? Even homosexuals can love horns (right, Woodog?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny dB Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 I wish it was the end of this thread! Gettin' tired of seeing Rosie's name on the top 2-Channel Audio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBusa Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 http://www.theonion.com/onion3604/why_do_all_these.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickman81 Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 ---------- The law of the land has never changed from the traditional definition of marriage. Those marriages are invalid. ---------- I'm glad you made this statement, it seems that no-one else has brought this up. I can't beleive that the massive insurance lawyers haven't challenged this in court. I never liked her anyway, and have hated her since she had Tom Selleck on her show and "dogged" him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm56 Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 jt1stcav, Mind my own business? I was replying to Woodog. Whose business are you minding? As for what people do consentually, in the privacy of their own home, I could not care less. The issue here, was same-sex marriage, the implications of which reach beyond those closed doors. There is a great divide here that most of us will never cross. I'm sorry I ever got involved in this topic. And true, it doesn't belong anywhere on the klipsch forums. Besides, I think I've pretty much made my point. No use beating it to death. It's falling on deaf ears for the most part anyway. Did someone say something about horn-loaded speakers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodog Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 ---------------- On 3/6/2004 1:59:24 AM jt1stcav wrote: Even homosexuals can love horns (right, Woodog?) ---------------- LMAO... so many fini-esque possibilities but I'm not going there. Indeed, I love my Cornmalls and Heresys (and tubes! what a sonic revelation!) and have even gotten a 222-B for my 12 y/o son to use on his room stereo (with the 2nd pair of Heresys I got). Is it possible for straight people to love audio? How do they do it? forrest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodog Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 ---------------- On 3/6/2004 9:09:08 AM James D McCall wrote: jt1stcav, Mind my own business? I was replying to Woodog. Whose business are you minding? ---------------- Okay, then I'll say it. Mind your own business! (talk to the hand, etc.) (Listening to Billie Holliday singing "Ain't Nobody's Business If I Do" as I type.. fun stuff) As to your sorrow over my 'problem' and your explanation of the 'struggle' that followed, I've heard it all. Been there, done that (sold the t-shirt at a yard sale) The only problem I've ever had is allowing a mindset similar to yours to define who I am. I'm in a good place today and your ICB (see the rant for a definition) had nothing to do with my happiness today. As to your sorrow about the 'so called Christian orginization', well, let me say that I've never known a snowflake to take responsibility for an avalanche. (Not that I would call YOU a snowflake in a Christian organization). I'm with the other poster who is tired of seeing Rosie's name at the top of the 2-channel forum. Not a peep more from me on this subject. 'tis a shame to, since you never answered my questions. with all due respect (you can figure the amount), Forrest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwatkins Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 ---------------- On 3/5/2004 10:32:13 PM James D McCall wrote: Henry, OK, I want to hit these one at a time: Is slavery a moral issue? I think that is debatable. I'm not saying it is good or right by any means, in fact I think forced slavery is one of the most horrible institutions man has ever concocted, but I just don't know that strictly speaking, it is a moral issue. It certainly has no place in a democracy where individual liberty is valued, though. When were women required to be silent? In America? Maybe you're referring to the N.T. scripture that admonishes women to keep silent in the church and not to usurp mens authority. Kids are required to be silent in classrooms all around the world. Is that immoral? Voting - I don't see this as a moral issue either, but instead as a social issue. As for the "federalistic will of the wealthy", well that's just the way of the world, isn't it. At all times and in all lands, "them what's got get's more". Again, I don't see that as a moral issue. ---------------- Slavery - nope, can't give to any of your argument here. Owning another human is not simply reprehensible to a form of government, group of individuals or a social issue. It is explicitly morally wrong and I can fathom no rationale otherwise that makes it reasonable to completely control another human's life and choices without consent of the individual (say as a paid employee). It is number one on my list of morality no-nos - its effect is devastating to a group of folks as a whole and lasts for generations afterwards. I think you will find the Bible has some strong words about slavery in the old testament. Silent women - I am referring to the N.T. scripture based common early laws in this country. This is a milder (not by tons) form of slavery that results in arranged marraiges and is a legally enforceable method to silence primary participants in a society. It can be argued this is societal and I won't go as far as in my above defense. Regardless, it takes centuries to reverse such nearly despicable reductions in a human's freedoms. Voting - how do we determine the true common mores without inclusion? Will of the wealthy - you win here - it is best used as a final statement to make my point. When folks talk about the foundations of the start of this country we need to be explicitly honest - Our constitution and laws were established by, and for the benefit of, wealthy white men. Puritanical Christian views worked well for that view. Even the casual observer sees that that start is still quite evident in our current society. My point - we should continue to review and challenge that foundation when common sense and common mores tell us there may be a conflict. This same sex marraige thing's time has come - just like inter-racial marriage, women's sufferage, civil rights, etc. cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted March 6, 2004 Author Share Posted March 6, 2004 Sorry to continue the prominence of this thread, but: HW: "This same sex marraige thing's time has come - just like inter-racial marriage, women's sufferage, civil rights, etc" In a nutshell - perfect! Couple of other thoughts: Marriage - 5000 years old? Monogamous maybe - I think Polygamous and Polyandrous both pre-date it. Polygamous is definitely very biblical (OT at least). It also seems a little unfair of God to expect us all to fight our homosexual urges. Seems kinda walk in the park for those of us not naturally homosexual but rather more demanding for those that are. Of course from memory I think he is not a big fan of masterbation either - so whilst I walk the first hurdle, I spill at the second (pun indended). Ah well - looks like hell and damnation for me despite the fact I am a really nice guy. Still - judging by the brilliant sinners on this forum I wont be alone and it looks like the devil will have a kickass sound system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt1stcav Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 ---------------- On 3/6/2004 9:09:08 AM James D McCall wrote: jt1stcav, "Mind my own business? I was replying to Woodog. Whose business are you minding?... ...Did someone say something about horn-loaded speakers?" ---------------- James, I was making a general statement not related directly towards you...sorry for the tone. But I do get sick of others who feel their way is the only way, and damn all others who disagree. This is an ongoing arguement that will go on indefinately; people will have their opinions about same-sex and interracial marriages (and anything else controversial), and the subject will never please both sides I'm afraid. You just have to have an open mind these days, accept things for what they are, and go on living your life to its fullest (and not worry so much about others and their choices they make..."live and let live")! Teach your children the differences, but not to be judgemental of others or their differences. Oh, and James (this is directed to you), I said that my bro just bought a pair of Klipsch KG 3.2s...must've heard my rants about how great Klipsch horn-loaded speakers are that he finally decided to give 'em a try! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm56 Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 Max, If you are going to compare same-sex marriage to civil rights, then by all means, why stop with that? How about pedophiles rights, how about nudist's rights, how about pyromaniacs rights, how about murderers rights, (aren't they born that way too, therefore their urges should not only be protected , but promoted and codified into law). Exactly where would you draw the line? Anywhere? Come on, tell me...Man, I would not want to live in that world. Max, just because polygamy existed in bible times scarcely means it was God's will. It never was. It just means that they were sinners, too. Like all of us. And Max, your last couple of paragraphs descended into nothing more than mocking God. Which tells me I can't reason with you on a moral issue. Without God, there IS no morality. After all, His laws are what defines morality Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted March 6, 2004 Share Posted March 6, 2004 There is nothing worse than someone relying on Slippery Slope reasoning when arguing this type of subject matter. There is some really depressing arguing going on with ye olde horse blinders used to full effect. kh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.