Topic started by Karuvayan (@ cs2417534-176.austin.rr.com) on Mon Jun 16 18:25:54 .
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2980250.stm

"Some Anglican churches in Canada have already offered blessings to gay and lesbian couples. "

Responses:

• From: eyus-al-bakridi (@ proxify.com) on: Thu Jul 24 09:05:59 EDT 2003
  
  The Gospel Dates
  The Pauline epistles do not reveal any historical Jesus; nor do they demonstrate any knowledge of the existence of the four canonical gospels. The gospels themselves cannot be viewed as "history" written by "eyewitnesses," as has been proved repeatedly. Besides the fact that they date to much later than is supposed, the gospels frequently contradict each other, and, evidently based on the numerous manuscripts composed over the centuries, have been determined (by German theologian Johann Griesbach, for one) to be a mass of some 150,000 "variant readings." As one writer says:
  
  In fact, no two ancient manuscripts of the New Testament agree in every respect, and more than 30,000 different readings have been discovered in one examination of 150 ancient manuscripts of The Gospel according to Luke alone.
  
  The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, an apparently a Christian text, contains this information in an article written by M.M. Parvis (vol. 4, 594-595), who states:
  
  The New Testament is now known, in whole or in part, in nearly five thousand Greek manuscripts alone. Every one of these handwritten copies differ from the other one… It has been estimated that these manuscripts and quotations differ among themselves between 150,000 and 250,000 times. The actual figure is, perhaps, much higher. A study of 150 Greek manuscripts of the Gospel of Luke has revealed more than 30,000 different readings… It is safe to say that there is not one sentence in the New Testament in which the manuscripts' tradition is wholly uniform.
  
  Some sources place the figure for the "variant readings" even higher, including The Anchor Bible Dictionary On CD-ROM ("Textual Criticism, NT"), which says, "Perhaps 300,000 differing readings is a fair figure for the 20th century (K. W. Clark 1962: 669)." So much for "God's infallible Word" and his "inspired scribes." Apologists, of course, will come up with all sorts of excuses for this manmade mess; suffice it to say that their excuses only demonstrate further that man's hand--and not that of the Almighty God--has been involved in the creation of Christianity and its texts at every step.
  
  It would be impossible to date the appearance of the gospels based on the extant manuscripts, of course, since the autographs or originals were destroyed long ago, an act that would appear to be the epitome of blasphemy, were these texts truly the precious testimonials by the Lord's very disciples themselves. The oldest fragments that are conclusively parts of the gospels date to the third century:
  
  The oldest papyrus fragments still in existence which contain any sizeable amount of the text of the New Testament date only to the third century AD, and the very oldest fragment in existence, which is claimed to belong to The Gospel according to John 18:31-33, dates only to about 150 AD. However, this particular fragment could very well belong to some earlier extra-canonical gospel such as The Acts of Pilate, otherwise known as The Gospel of Nicodemus. This work is quoted by Justin Martyr (110-165 AD) in his First Apology, along with another early Christian document called The Memoirs of the Apostles. Although Justin makes no mention of any of the four canonical Gospels by name or of any of the other books which now make up the New Testament, he makes extensive quotations from writings similar to these and also from a number of extra-canonical books such as The Gospel of Nicodemus, The Gospel of the Ebionites, The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, The Gospel of the Hebrews, and The Protevangelium of James. Although early Christian writers appear to quote from the canonical Gospels, the earliest writer to mention all four of them by name was Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, c.200 AD, in his treatise Against Heresies, Chapter 11.
  
  In reality, the four gospels selected for inclusion in the New Testament do not make any appearance until the third quarter of the 2nd century, between 170 and 180 CE, and even then they are not much mentioned for a couple of decades. The orthodox dating, of course, attempts to put the gospels a century earlier, between 70 and 110 CE. However, it should be kept in mind that the current mainstream dating was heretical when first propagated, over 150 years ago, causing apoplexy in the faithful. In fact, over the centuries, because of increasingly scientific scholarship, the date of the canonical gospels has been continually pushed to later decades. Believers, naturally, have wished to date the composition of the gospels within a few years or decades of "the Savior's death." Nevertheless, it has long been accepted that there is absolutely no evidence, internal or external, for such an early date. The early dating, in fact, is mere wishful thinking on the part of those who truly believe that Jesus Christ existed and that his words, deed and life were faithfully recorded by eyewitnesses, i.e., his disciples. Such a scenario is not reality, and the most scholarship can offer in bending the dates to fit the alleged advent of Jesus Christ during the time of Herod is that the gospels were composed during the last decades of the first century. The internal evidence cited for this "late" a date is that the gospel writers were aware of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. Therefore, Mark, which is considered by most mainstream authorities to be the earliest of the gospels, could not have been written any earlier than 70 CE. The others followed, with John appearing perhaps as late as 110 CE. That is where mainstream scholarship ends. Nonetheless, the fact remains that the gospels are conspicuously absent from the writings of the Church fathers and apologists through the end of the second century.
  
  The priority of Mark was proposed as early as 1786 by Storr and argued in detail by Christian Wilke in 1838. According to proponents of the specious "outdated" argument, which claims that newer scholarship is better and more correct merely by virtue of its "modernity," the Markan-priority thesis is a very "outdated" premise and must therefore be wrong. By this same argument, "Q" scholarship is likewise "outdated," because it too began over a century and a half ago, with the research of Christian Weiss, also in 1838. It should be noted that even the existence of a Q document has been argued against by a number of scholars, including Farrer (1955), Farmer (1964) and Hobbs (1980). Yet, to go against the crowd is supposedly to commit scholarly heresy and suicide!
  
  In reality, critics of the Mark-priority thesis must come afterwards, obviously, which makes their theories more "modern." G.R.S. Mead, writing after the Markan-priority thesis was proposed, was insistent that the other synoptists did not use the canonical Mark:
  
  It is very evident that Mt. and Lk. do not use our Mk., though they use most of the material contained in our Mk….
  
  Indeed, scholars hit upon an "Ur-Markus" or source of Mark from which all three synoptics have drawn. Hence, it is asserted by Ur-Markus proponents that the other two synoptics did not use the canonical Mark. The Ur-Markus theory was developed by Weisse in the 1850s. At the end of the 19th century, Hernle attempted to prove that Ur-Markus was the canonical Mark, and the debate was supposedly "settled" in the 1920s. Yet, modern mainstream scholars continue to debate the priority. As Burton Mack says, in The Lost Gospel of Q:
  
  Even today there are scholars who continue…to favor Matthew as the earliest gospel.
  
  Indeed, following Griesbach (1783), the Tübingen School in the 1830s maintained not only the priority of but also the late date of 130 CE for Matthew, swimming firmly against the tide. Scholars of the 20th century who argued for the priority of Matthew include "Jameson, Chapman, Butler, and Wenham."
  
  http://www.truthbeknown.com/historicaljc.htm
  
  
• From: pj2 (@ ns2.barclaysglobal.com) on: Thu Jul 24 11:02:49 EDT 2003
  
  ok what does Hinduisum say about Gays ?
  
  
• From: BAB (@ cache-dp09.proxy.aol.com) on: Thu Jul 24 15:16:33 EDT 2003
  
  Hinduism says that all is God, meaning that there can be no activity outside of God. Can homosexuality be outside of God?
  
  
• From: K (@ dial0-173.dialin.uic.edu) on: Tue Jul 20 01:37:15
  
  test
  
  
• From: mr.mister (@ mv3-24.171.24.128.charter-stl.com) on: Tue Jul 20 02:58:32 EDT 2004
  
  Rome catholism comes from Rome which formulated a religion from it's pagan roots to subjugate people. This is not true religion of christianity.
  
  Anti-Christ is believed to emerge from ROME.Vatican wants a new world order. Not true christins.
  
  
• From: mr.mister (@ mv3-24.171.24.128.charter-stl.com) on: Tue Jul 20 03:06:30 EDT 2004
  
  U see Europe is moving in the right directions by Prophecy.
  
  1. Anti - christ is to emerge from Rome.
  2. This Rome is none other than the EU.Fore more info ..go to TOWER OF BABEL- THE NEW EU PARLIMENT.
  3. Buying and selling will be done only if person has number on head-666- THE INTRODUCTIOIN OF BIO-CHIPS IN THE MARKET.
  
  SO ROME CAN GO BACK TO IT'S PAGAN ROOTS AS PER PROPHECY.
  
  
• From: Bond, Mummudi Bond (@ 90.75.108.194.contactel.net) on: Tue Jul 20 04:06:12 EDT 2004
  
  Jesus had half a d-i-c-k, but I have a whole one. And my mother could suck better than Mary, any day.
  
  My mother could swallow a cock better than a vaccum sucking up gravity. None of my gay bf's has ever given me such a good blowjob, as that lavde kabaal mother of mine. I really miss the bit-ch.
  
  
  
  
  
• From: Bond, Mummudi Bond (@ 90.75.108.194.contactel.net) on: Tue Jul 20 04:06:17 EDT 2004
  
  Jesus had half a d-i-c-k, but I have a whole one. And my mother could suck better than Mary, any day.
  
  My mother could swallow a cock better than a vaccum sucking up gravity. None of my gay bf's has ever given me such a good blowjob, as that lavde kabaal mother of mine. I really miss the bit-ch.
  
  
  
  
  
• From: Bond, Mummudi Bond (@ 90.75.108.194.contactel.net) on: Tue Jul 20 04:06:22 EDT 2004
  
  Jesus had half a d-i-c-k, but I have a whole one. And my mother could suck better than Mary, any day.
  
  My mother could swallow a cock better than a vaccum sucking up gravity. None of my gay bf's has ever given me such a good blowjob, as that lavde kabaal mother of mine. I really miss the bit-ch.
  
  
  
  
  
• From: Bond, Mummudi Bond (@ 90.75.108.194.contactel.net) on: Tue Jul 20 04:06:28 EDT 2004
  
  Jesus had half a d-i-c-k, but I have a whole one. And my mother could suck better than Mary, any day.
  
  My mother could swallow a cock better than a vaccum sucking up gravity. None of my gay bf's has ever given me such a good blowjob, as that lavde kabaal mother of mine. I really miss the bit-ch.
  
  
  
  
  
• From: Bond, Mummudi Bond (@ 90.75.108.194.contactel.net) on: Tue Jul 20 04:06:34 EDT 2004
  
  Jesus had half a d-i-c-k, but I have a whole one. And my mother could suck better than Mary, any day.
  
  My mother could swallow a cock better than a vaccum sucking up gravity. None of my gay bf's has ever given me such a good blowjob, as that lavde kabaal mother of mine. I really miss the bit-ch.
  
  
  
  
  
• From: Bond, Mummudi Bond (@ 90.75.108.194.contactel.net) on: Tue Jul 20 04:06:39 EDT 2004
  
  Jesus had half a d-i-c-k, but I have a whole one. And my mother could suck better than Mary, any day.
  
  My mother could swallow a cock better than a vaccum sucking up gravity. None of my gay bf's has ever given me such a good blowjob, as that lavde kabaal mother of mine. I really miss the bit-ch.
  
  
  
  
  
• From: Bond, Mummudi Bond (@ 90.75.108.194.contactel.net) on: Tue Jul 20 04:06:45 EDT 2004
  
  Jesus had half a d-i-c-k, but I have a whole one. And my mother could suck better than Mary, any day.
  
  My mother could swallow a cock better than a vaccum sucking up gravity. None of my gay bf's has ever given me such a good blowjob, as that lavde kabaal mother of mine. I really miss the bit-ch.
  
  
  
  
  
• From: Surya (@ adsl-64-166-143-81.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net) on: Tue Jul 20 19:41:03 EDT 2004
  
  well, considering that most of the catholic priests are homo-pedophiles, its not a big surprice.
  
  

Want to post a response?