The Trinity: Was Athanasius Scripturally Right?

[sojourner]

Mark 6:3 Then they scoffed, “He’s just a carpenter, the son of Mary and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas, and Simon. And his sisters live right here among us.” They were deeply offended and refused to believe in him.

Yes, yes. I know; it's a worn-out argument. Just because Mark includes the phrase doesn't mean that it was so.

 

[sojourner]

The armies were mostly filled with those claiming to be Christian.

Still doesn't prove the claim.

I see now you do not really want to admit that the churches have mostly supported war

"Supporting war," "remaining tacit," and "being a Christian" also don't prove the claim. I harbor no illusions with regard to the bloody history of Xy. But the fact remains that most Christians have not killed.

 

[Deeje]

This is getting tedious...we have covered all this....and can you please stop putting things in large type...it messes up the quote system.

I don't see any inference that Jesus is Michael. You see inference in something that the bible doesn't say, that Jesus is Michael, but you don't see inference in what the bible does say, that Jesus is God.

So far this is what I gathered:

1) According to Historians and Theologians Jesus Uses “I Am” to refer himself to God

• John 8:58,59 - Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am." So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple

Jesus never claimed to be the "I AM" because God's name never was "I AM" to begin with.
Jesus' reference to his age in John 8:58 was not about his divinity...he was answering a question put to him by the Jews asking how a man of less than 50 years old could claim to have existed before Abraham...?

According tio the Tanakh the rendering of Exodus 3:13-15....
"And Moses said to God, "Behold I come to the children of Israel, and I say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?"
יגוַיֹּ֨אמֶר משֶׁ֜ה אֶל־הָֽאֱלֹהִ֗ים הִנֵּ֨ה אָֽנֹכִ֣י בָא֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ וְאָֽמַרְתִּ֣י לָהֶ֔ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י אֲבֽוֹתֵיכֶ֖ם שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם וְאָֽמְרוּ־לִ֣י מַה־שְּׁמ֔וֹ מָ֥ה אֹמַ֖ר אֲלֵהֶֽם:

14 God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'"
וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם:

15 And God said further to Moses, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'The Lord God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is My name forever, and this is how I should be mentioned in every generation. טווַיֹּ֩אמֶר֩ ע֨וֹד אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֶל־משֶׁ֗ה כֹּ֣ה תֹאמַר֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ יְהֹוָ֞ה אֱלֹהֵ֣י אֲבֹֽתֵיכֶ֗ם אֱלֹהֵ֨י אַבְרָהָ֜ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִצְחָ֛ק וֵֽאלֹהֵ֥י יַֽעֲקֹ֖ב שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם זֶה־שְּׁמִ֣י לְעֹלָ֔ם וְזֶ֥ה זִכְרִ֖י לְדֹ֥ר דֹּֽר: "

"The Lord God" is YAHWEH.....יְהֹוָ֞ה
God's name means "I Will Be What I Will BE"....it never was "I AM". Jesus never claimed to be Yahweh.

2) Jesus is called “God” in the scriptures with a Capital “G”

• Isaiah 9:6 "For a child has been born to us, A son has been given to us; And the rulership will rest on his shoulder. His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace,"

• John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

There was no upper and lower case in Koine Greek....so there was no such thing as a "capital letter". I have been over this several times. The Word was "with THE God" but the word was only "theos" a word used to describe a Mighty One, which is what the Greeks worshipped..."mighty gods" who were anything but moral or righteous. Satan is called "theos" as well....you are not seeing what the scriptures say because you don't want to.

3) Thomas calls Jesus Lord and God

• John 20: 28 Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"

In the Greek translation yes, Thomas called Jesus his "god" but as an apostle he agreed with all the others...there was only one God (Capital "G") and a "mighty one" their "Lord Jesus Christ".
1 Corinthians 8:5-6....
"For even though there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” 6 there is actually to us one God, the Father, from whom all things are and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and we through him."

There are "many gods and many lords" but there is only one Almighty God....THE Father of Jesus...the same God and Father of all who know him and love him.

4) Paul calls Jesus God and Savior

• Titus 2:13 “Waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ

In the Greek, it doesn't say what it implies in the English translation.....
Titus 2:13, Interlinear....
13 waiting for prosdechomai the ho blessed makarios hope elpis, the appearing epiphaneia of the ho glory doxa of ho our hēmeis great megas God theos and kai Savior sōtēr Jesus Iēsous Christ Christos"

You will notice that in the Greek there is no word for "of"....it is inserted in the English translation to facilitate the correct meaning by the translators. By leaving out this one little word, in one part of that sentence, (because of trinitarian bias) the translators have altered the whole meaning....
It can correctly be translated..."while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of our Savior, Jesus Christ" ......here it is separating the two, just as Paul did in 1 Corinthians 8:5-6...just as Jesus himself did in John 17:3.

5) Peter calls Jesus God, Lord, and Savior

• 2 Peter 1:1 Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:

• 2 Peter 1: 11 For in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

The same applies. I don't think you have any idea of the forces at work to corrupt the clear teachings of the Bible...they can't alter the words but by biased translation they can certainly alter the meaning.

6) Scripture says Jesus created all things and the God created all things by Himself and all alone

• Col 1:16, 17 - For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

• Isaiah, 44:24, "Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, 'I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, stretching out the heavens by Myself, and spreading out the earth all alone.'"

Already covered all this...you are not listening because you don't want to. You claim to be taking an unbiased approach to the scriptures but that is clearly not your position. You are looking to defend the trinity even when it has been brought to your attention that the scriptures you are using don't say in Greek what the English translators infer.

7) God is called “Mighty God” and Jesus is called “Mighty God”

• Isaiah 9:6 A son has been given to us; And the rulership will rest on his shoulder. His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace,"

• At Isaiah 10: 21 it says … remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God.

• At: Jeremiah 32:18 O great and mighty God.

• At: Zephaniah 3:17). Who is this mighty one?

Again?

8) God calls Jesus “God”

• At Hebrews 1:8 But about the Son he [Jehovah] says, "Your throne, O God, will last forever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.

Already explained that one too.....

9) History confirms the first century Christians believed that Jesus was God

• Professor Bart Ehrman of Religious Studies at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. “Jesus in the Gospel of John makes a series of stunning declarations about himself, in which he indicates that he existed in eternity past in the glory of God and that he himself is equal with God.”

• Historian, David Brakke, Chair in the History of Christianity and a Professor of History “The concept of creation through the Word is inspired by how God creates in Genesis—by speaking. In John, the Word has become not merely God’s speech, but a being in his own right—a being who both is God and is with God.”

• "...The church ... also believed with the first simple Christians that Jesus Christ was God on earth." (Origin and Evolution of Religion, E. W. Hopkins, p339 p. 339 on p. 336 it reads, "The beginning of the doctrine of the Trinity appears already in John."

And what doctrines do these so called experts subscribe to....? Seriously....there is not an unbiased source among those.

Good grief...did you learn nothing about Jesus parable of the "wheat and the weeds"? The apostasy that Jesus and the apostles foretold took over not long after the death of the apostle John at the end of the first century....anything written after that has to be cautiously analyzed to see if there is a deviation from what Jesus taught....its not hard to spot them unless you are already indoctrinated.

It seems to me that to understand these scriptures you have to understand the trinity, otherwise, you won't understand them.

Or conversely, if you don't accept their translation, the trinity is a non-existent. If it is a blasphemous teaching that is accepted by the majority, then you can understand why Jesus said that "FEW" are on the road to life. (Matthew 7:13-14)

God's true worshippers have never been in the majority. It is human nature to run with the mob. Why do you imagine that the Jews as a nation rejected their messiah?....because the religious "experts" convinced them that he was a phony.

I am done with you on this topic....believe as you wish...its your choice.

 

[SLPCCC]

This is getting tedious...we have covered all this....and can you please stop putting things in large type...it messes up the quote system.

Deeje, I've read what you put up. I'm doing research and you are proselytizing. I'm reading what historians and theologians have found. You are teaching what your church is teaching you. I'm using neutral bibles and you are using the NWT bible which has been edited to support the WT doctrine. You are using materials that your church has written. Think about this. If I send you to a Catholic online library site to prove to you that praying to Mary is a bible teaching, don't you think that they are going to have all the scriptures and materials on the site to try to convince me that praying to Mary is scriptural??? That's what you are doing. And you are going into the WT library and posting their doctrine. You are not going to neutral sources and getting facts from scholars because you are proselytizing. The question here is whether or not the first century Christains believed in the trinity and why? How did Athanasius convince the early church? All modern religious historians and scholars will say yes and scriptures show this which I've been posting. You say otherwise, not because of historical facts, but because you follow a group called the Governing Body. The words Governing Body is not in the bible and there is no historical evidence that they ever existed during the apostles' time. It would be wise if you learn from the facts and stop reading their fabricated doctrine. This is a religion that predicted the end of time in 1914 and was wrong. What else are they wrong on? I love the JW people but they are wrong on many scriptures.

 

[YoursTrue]

1) Who resurrected Jesus from the dead?

• The Father - Rom 10: 9 - because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
• The Son - John 2: 19-22 - Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." The Jews then said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?" But he was speaking about the temple of his body. When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken.
• And The Holy Spirit - Rom 8: 9-11 - You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. . . If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

Answer: All three raised Jesus.


2) In whose name were they to be baptized?

• Matt 28: 19, 20 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

Answer: Notice that it says, "in the name" and not "in the names" plural. It points to the fact that they are in some sense one.

Jesus said he is one with the Father. He also said the Father is greater than he is.

 

[YoursTrue]

Deeje, I've read what you put up. I'm doing research and you are proselytizing. I'm reading what historians and theologians have found. You are teaching what your church is teaching you. I'm using neutral bibles and you are using the NWT bible which has been edited to support the WT doctrine. You are using materials that your church has written. Think about this. If I send you to a Catholic online library site to prove to you that praying to Mary is a bible teaching, don't you think that they are going to have all the scriptures and materials on the site to try to convince me that praying to Mary is scriptural??? That's what you are doing. And you are going into the WT library and posting their doctrine. You are not going to neutral sources and getting facts from scholars because you are proselytizing. The question here is whether or not the first century Christains believed in the trinity and why? How did Athanasius convince the early church? All modern religious historians and scholars will say yes and scriptures show this which I've been posting. You say otherwise, not because of historical facts, but because you follow a group called the Governing Body. The words Governing Body is not in the bible and there is no historical evidence that they ever existed during the apostles' time. It would be wise if you learn from the facts and stop reading their fabricated doctrine. This is a religion that predicted the end of time in 1914 and was wrong. What else are they wrong on? I love the JW people but they are wrong on many scriptures.

I've seen the proof Catholic theologians and scholars will use to support prayer to Mary. I don't see it supported well in the Bible, one reason why I guess I'm not a Catholic. I also don't see proof for the Trinity doctrine, although there are some interpretations of scripture that seem to support the trinity doctrine. I know, however, there are reasons to believe otherwise. For instance, we could talk about the creation of Adam and Eve. Some believe it was foreordained for them to sin. Some don't even think they sinned. God, by the way, doesn't need to be in the flesh and be of one essence, and die to save people. God does not die. No part of God dies. Neither he nor his essence die.

 

[YoursTrue]

Still doesn't prove the claim.


"Supporting war," "remaining tacit," and "being a Christian" also don't prove the claim. I harbor no illusions with regard to the bloody history of Xy. But the fact remains that most Christians have not killed.

Glad you agree that it's a bloody history. And most of the human population has not "killed," to the best of my reasoning ability. Maybe they have, but I figure most have not killed. But -- just like Jesus was a carpenter before he began his ministry and not God-on-earth-in-the-flesh -- more importantly, however, the armies of the western world in the past many centuries have been composed of those calling themselves Christian, killing fellow Christians as well as others. Not a real good record as far as I am looking at it. Jesus was a carpenter, and the armies of the western world have been composed since Constantine's journey into vision-land and the masses following him, of mostly those called Christian. (Since you claim to have a shaman-type belief, do you receive visions?)

 

[YoursTrue]

1) Who resurrected Jesus from the dead?

• The Father - Rom 10: 9 - because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
• The Son - John 2: 19-22 - Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." The Jews then said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?" But he was speaking about the temple of his body. When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken.
• And The Holy Spirit - Rom 8: 9-11 - You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. . . If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

Answer: All three raised Jesus.


2) In whose name were they to be baptized?

• Matt 28: 19, 20 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

Answer: Notice that it says, "in the name" and not "in the names" plural. It points to the fact that they are in some sense one.

In some sense, yes.

 

[firedragon]

Jesus said he is one with the Father.

You mean he said "I and my father are one". If that means "One with the father", then he also says the same thing about the disciples. So, in that case, they all must be "One with the father".

 

[Deeje]

Deeje, I've read what you put up. I'm doing research and you are proselytizing. I'm reading what historians and theologians have found. You are teaching what your church is teaching you. I'm using neutral bibles and you are using the NWT bible which has been edited to support the WT doctrine. You are using materials that your church has written. Think about this. If I send you to a Catholic online library site to prove to you that praying to Mary is a bible teaching, don't you think that they are going to have all the scriptures and materials on the site to try to convince me that praying to Mary is scriptural??? That's what you are doing. And you are going into the WT library and posting their doctrine. You are not going to neutral sources and getting facts from scholars because you are proselytizing. The question here is whether or not the first century Christains believed in the trinity and why? How did Athanasius convince the early church? All modern religious historians and scholars will say yes and scriptures show this which I've been posting. You say otherwise, not because of historical facts, but because you follow a group called the Governing Body. The words Governing Body is not in the bible and there is no historical evidence that they ever existed during the apostles' time. It would be wise if you learn from the facts and stop reading their fabricated doctrine. This is a religion that predicted the end of time in 1914 and was wrong. What else are they wrong on? I love the JW people but they are wrong on many scriptures.

Your choice to make....I'm done.

 

[YoursTrue]

Because the author of Matthew isn't dealing with individual souls -- he's dealing with the "true Israel."

Please explain how you know and why you say that the author is dealing with the "true Israel." Thank you.

 

[YoursTrue]

You mean he said "I and my father are one". If that means "One with the father", then he also says the same thing about the disciples. So, in that case, they all must be "One with the father".

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes, yes. I know; it's a worn-out argument. Just because Mark includes the phrase doesn't mean that it was so.

It's a worn-out argument to quote Mark to show that Jesus was a carpenter??

 

[Deeje]

I don't know what you mean by "tacit support" in all cases. Yes, this is a moral/ethical problem. I've studied it extensively in seminary. There used to be a notion called "just war," which supposedly was biblically-based. It's outdated now. I don't agree with it. But it's a very sticky situation when threats come along. We have to ask ourselves the question: is it better to allow tyrants, despots, and evil to overrun your land? Or is it better to take care of business? I suppose that if you were in the USA, you'd be satisfied saying "I won't fight," while letting others fight in your place so that you can continue to worship as you see fit? I suppose you'd be cool with having to learn Russian or German and being forced to salute leaders who have their boot on your neck? You see the problem? The problem is that there are evil, powerful people who have to be stood up against by somebody in order for an equitable society to be maintained. It's an unfortunate part of the human condition -- not the Christian condition.

That is just the kind of justification I would expect from those in Christendom who think that way. Jehovah's Witnesses have withstood that very treatment and upheld Jesus' teachings even in the face of death. You want a definition of courage....there it is. A true Christian takes a bullet for someone...but he will never fire one. A real Christian will be able to say to one whose son or daughter was sacrificed to the god of war.....their life was not taken by any in my brotherhood.

The majority of Christendom's adherents are conditioned by that other "religion"...taught to them from birth....nationalism. That hand on the heart, my country right or wrong....makes them emotionally vulnerable to the kind of thinking you just presented.

How can a Christian be a flag waving patriot and still follow the teachings of Christ, who said that God was not racially partial. How can you kill a person just because they happen to be on the other side of a political conflict? War is legalized murder....the agenda is usually corrupt. I don't believe that corrupt conduct is "legal" to God.

How can Jesus tell us to 'love our enemies' and we just ignore him and go shoot them or drop bombs on them?
As James said...."Know this, my beloved brothers: Everyone must be quick to listen, slow to speak, slow to anger, 20 for man’s anger does not bring about God’s righteousness. 21 Therefore, put away all filthiness and every trace of badness, and accept with mildness the implanting of the word that is able to save you.

22 However, become doers of the word and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves with false reasoning."

Patriotism leading to bloodshed, or even tacit support for it, is false reasoning IMO....if you consent to the bloodshed, then you are just as guilty as the one who pulled the trigger. (Matthew 5:43-45) There is no way for a Christian to justify killing another human being. The devil is the ruler of this world so let him and his own fight it out amongst themselves. We will have no part of it.

No. it isn't. This is exactly why you get blowback from me. This is alluding to same-sex practices -- not homosexual practices.

I'm sorry...what?

What does "homosexual" mean? Is it not 'a sexual attraction between same sex people'? How are same sex practices not homosexual practices?
How can you misunderstand Leviticus 18:22?
"You shall not lie down with a male, as with a woman: this is an abomination." (Tanakh)

Why does God consider this activity to be an "abomination"? That is not just a minor bit of annoyance.....is it?

Jude 7...
"In the same manner, Sodʹom and Go·morʹrah and the cities around them also gave themselves over to gross sexual immorality and pursued unnatural fleshly desires; they are placed before us as a warning example by undergoing the judicial punishment of everlasting fire." (Genesis 19:4-5)

Jesus never spoke directly about homosexuality but he was Jewish and he upheld all of God's laws. The sexual laws were very specific. He never neutralized them.

There's an important exegetical difference that must be taken under consideration in order to arrive at a viable theological stance. Simply saying, "God said it, I believe it, that settles it" isn't good enough. It disrespects both God and the texts, and invites dehumanization of others.

So not taking God at his word and fudging scripture allows people to thumb their noses at God's law and carry on gross sin with impunity, just to cater to the fallen flesh.....nice.

I'm sure they will all thank the ones who told them it was all OK for them to do what they desired, when the judgment comes....?

 

[firedragon]

What does "homosexual" mean? Is it not 'a sexual attraction between same sex people'? How are same sex practices not homosexual practices?
How can you misunderstand Leviticus 18:22?
"You shall not lie down with a male, as with a woman: this is an abomination." (Tanakh)

Why does God consider this activity to be an "abomination"? That is not just a minor bit of annoyance.....is it?

Jude 7...
"In the same manner, Sodʹom and Go·morʹrah and the cities around them also gave themselves over to gross sexual immorality and pursued unnatural fleshly desires; they are placed before us as a warning example by undergoing the judicial punishment of everlasting fire." (Genesis 19:4-5)

Jesus never spoke directly about homosexuality but he was Jewish and he upheld all of God's laws. The sexual laws were very specific. He never neutralized them.

Homosexuality is critically explained with one single word in the new testament. Not only Tanah.

Its "Covet+Men" or "Men+Bed". Yet, thats not Jesus speaking, its Saul.

 

[Deeje]

Homosexuality is critically explained with one single word in the new testament. Not only Tanah.

Its "Covet+Men" or "Men+Bed". Yet, thats not Jesus speaking, its Saul.

You'll have to be a bit more specific than that.....

 

[sojourner]

Glad you agree that it's a bloody history. And most of the human population has not "killed," to the best of my reasoning ability. Maybe they have, but I figure most have not killed. But -- just like Jesus was a carpenter before he began his ministry and not God-on-earth-in-the-flesh -- more importantly, however, the armies of the western world in the past many centuries have been composed of those calling themselves Christian, killing fellow Christians as well as others. Not a real good record as far as I am looking at it. Jesus was a carpenter, and the armies of the western world have been composed since Constantine's journey into vision-land and the masses following him, of mostly those called Christian. (Since you claim to have a shaman-type belief, do you receive visions?)

1) Your point about Jesus not being God is your opinion -- not mine.
2) Your assessment of the Faith based on how many Europeans were Christians is disingenuous and not important.
3) My spiritual experiences are not available for your scoffing.

 

[sojourner]

Please explain how you know and why you say that the author is dealing with the "true Israel." Thank you.

Extensive post-graduate study of Mathew's Gospel. But I'm sure you'll just scoff at that too. You're welcome.

 

[sojourner]

It's a worn-out argument to quote Mark to show that Jesus was a carpenter??

Yes.

 

[sojourner]

That is just the kind of justification I would expect from those in Christendom who think that way.

This post is just the kind of scoff I've come to expect from cult-think.

Jehovah's Witnesses have withstood that very treatment and upheld Jesus' teachings even in the face of death.

I don't believe you have upheld Jesus' teachings. Sorry; you don't get to distance yourself from this aspect of the human equation and your posts can't hide behind contrived piety.

You want a definition of courage....there it is.

Sounds a whole lot like justification of your own brand to me.

A real Christian will be able to say to one whose son or daughter was sacrificed to the god of war.....their life was not taken by any in my brotherhood.

No True Scotsman fallacy.

The majority of Christendom's adherents are conditioned by that other "religion"...taught to them from birth....nationalism.

stats and numbers, plz.

How can a Christian be a flag waving patriot and still follow the teachings of Christ, who said that God was not racially partial.

I acknowledged that it's a problem with no easy answer. I'd say that most Christians don't pay their tax dollars, pick up a weapon, charge a foxhole, or drop a bomb without serious wrestling with conscience. I don't say this with any sort of cavalier attitude. It's a moral dilemma about which we must make informed choices. Yet, your post chooses to condemn us for confronting that choice instead of relying on others to do the dirty work and then points fingers at us for being "immoral." Because Jesus was hypocritical all the time too.

if you consent to the bloodshed, then you are just as guilty as the one who pulled the trigger.

Who's "consenting?"

What does "homosexual" mean? Is it not 'a sexual attraction between same sex people'?

It's a sexual orientation.

How are same sex practices not homosexual practices?

Practices aren't either oriented or orientations. They're actions that can be undertaken by anyone of any orientation. One doesn't have to be homosexual in order to perform prison rape.

How can you misunderstand Leviticus 18:22?

What Leviticus is referring to is unclear. It's probably referring to … prison rape (which is not a homosexual act, it's just a same-sex form of violence). You see (and I'm sure you'll scoff at this too), that passage represents a cultural taboo and not a moral injunction. It has to do with how shame and honor are embodied in women and men. Women embodied shame; men embodied honor. It was shameful to treat another man as one would treat a woman, and it was shameful for a man to act in a woman's role in that culture.

Why does God consider this activity to be an "abomination"? That is not just a minor bit of annoyance.....is it?

God prohibits violence. Prison rape, gang rape, battlefield rape, pederasty -- all forms of violence. There is no similarity between those acts and the loving, consensual, equitable, and committed acts of same-sex people who love each other.

Jude 7...

Does not inform Genesis.

Jesus never spoke directly about homosexuality but he was Jewish and he upheld all of God's laws. The sexual laws were very specific. He never neutralized them.

Jesus was also a product of his culture. I'm sure that, were Jesus walking around today, he'd come down on the side of loving, committed, consensual, equitable same-sex relationships.

So not taking God at his word and fudging scripture allows people to thumb their noses at God's law and carry on gross sin with impunity, just to cater to the fallen flesh.....nice.

"Taking God at [God's] word" includes doing the scholastic work of actually exegeting the texts, since we don't have the benefit of being there and living in that culture. It means recognizing the sociological and cultural differences between ours and that of the biblical writers and compensating for those differences. "Reading words on a page" does not constitute "taking God at [God's] word."

I'm sure they will all thank the ones who told them it was all OK for them to do what they desired, when the judgment comes....?

More entitlement.