1716AU

Well, all he has to do is look in the mirror. Sometimes it sucks to get what you want, eh Lil' Nicky?

Reminds one of Republican behavior

What do you expect? Geeze, the SBC is perfectly at home telling God, "Hold my beer. I can do this better." These groups are more into revenge than they are loving their neighbor...well, unless they look just like them and think just like them. They are scared out of their mind as they are losing power and position, so of course they are into weaponry and protecting themselves, or lashing out against percieved enemies. And they have a massive enemy list. Which, if you're following Jesus, then you realize that is against His teaching. We have no enemies. People percieve us to be theirs, but we should be into sharing absolute Shalom with everyone around us and that we come into contact with. Changes the way that we percieve the world. An absolute pre-requisite to Follow Jesus is to be non-violent. Since He started attracting followers, that was one of the most important components to following Him. It feeds directly into "Love your neighbor as yourself." Even while having a couple of morons like Simon the Zealot and Peter as followers. It never ceases to amaze me how Protestants don't get this, especially the SBC. If you don't get it, you will never understand Paul at all. It deals with Second Temple Judaism and how Zeal leads you to kill for your faith. Once you figure that out, you learn a crapload about Paul and why his conversion was so amazing and revolutionary. And why following Jesus isn't for everybody.

Don't be fooled into thinking that Prosperity Gospel is not rampant within the Southern Baptist, Charismatic, and Evangelical denominations. It has been a deeply held view in these groups for the past forty years, at least.

When I was a child, I thought, spoke, and acted like a child. When I became a man, and met the living Christ, I dumped all that Evangelical and Charismatic cult crap in the nearest toilet and flushed.

Well, Clown School for Dummies isn't saying too much. Then again, you probably think Billy Graham was a well-educated theologian and had a very good grasp of the Gospel...

Oh, you have choices, you are just consistent at making poor ones

You certainly don't get New York law and order do you. Let me see if I can do it in your pithy Alabama-ese Bragg and the New York DA's office are not going to bring indictments unless they're pretty damn sure they've got his ass. You see, up there, like in dc, like in baltimore, like in philadelphia, like in Boston, they really like their conviction rates. Neither will the Fulton county district attorney. This is going to be fun to watch

Just 98% of you. By your actions. Talk is cheap.

Thanks Mikey. This truly explains a LOT about you. Just gotta love ignorance...

That didn't age well

I gotta give you props. 21 wins with this roster is pretty good.

It's so hard to take these wee Fox lambs seriously. Such unbelievably ignorant loser they have PROVEN to be. Even Fox News thinks so.

Just gotta say it, that was clutch. They earned it.

Last year they couldn't score to start a half, this year they can't score to end a half. It's just mind-boggling

I'm sorry about that! I thought that burcham said the bottom of the knife with runners at the corners tied at 12:00 on that stream. But I gotcha.

I never have heard of a baseball game at this level ending in a tie. That's pretty neat

There is no competition. The Right. Documented and seen everyday in they way they want to legislate and persecute the marginalized in our society. Honestly, they are just the biggest goobers on earth.

This isn’t the first time Pope Francis has shown himself to be a progressive leader when it comes to, among other things, gay Catholics. It’s a stance that has drawn the ire of some high-ranking bishops and ordinary Catholics, both on the African continent and elsewhere in the world. Read more: Pope Francis' visit to Africa comes at a defining moment for the Catholic church Some of these Catholics may argue that Pope Francis’s approach to LGBTI matters is a misinterpretation of Scripture (or the Bible). But is it? Scripture is particularly important for Christians. When church leaders refer to “the Bible” or “the Scriptures”, they usually mean “the Bible as we understand it through our theological doctrines”. The Bible is always interpreted by our churches through their particular theological lenses. As a biblical scholar, I would suggest that church leaders who use their cultures and theology to exclude homosexuals don’t read Scripture carefully. Instead, they allow their patriarchal fears to distort it, seeking to find in the Bible proof-texts that will support attitudes of exclusion. There are several instances in the Bible that underscore my point. Love of God and neighbour Mark’s Gospel, found in the New Testament, records that Jesus entered the Jerusalem temple on three occasions. First, he visited briefly, and “looked around at everything” (11:11). On the second visit he acted, driving “out those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves” (11:15). Jesus specifically targeted those who exploited the poorest of the people coming to the temple. On his third visit, Jesus spent considerable time in the temple itself (11:27-13:2). He met the full array of temple leadership, including chief priests, teachers of the law and elders. Each of these leadership sectors used their interpretation of Scripture to exclude rather than to include. The “ordinary people” (11:32 and 12:12) recognised that Jesus proclaimed a gospel of inclusion. They eagerly embraced him as he walked through the temple. In Mark 12:24, Jesus addresses the Sadducees, who were the traditional high priests of ancient Israel and played an important role in the temple. Among those who confronted Jesus, they represented the group that held to a conservative theological position and used their interpretation of the Scripture to exclude. Jesus said to them: Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that you do not understand the Scriptures or the power of God? Jesus recognised that they chose to interpret Scripture in a way that prevented it from being understood in non-traditional ways. Thus they limited God’s power to be different from traditional understandings of him. Jesus was saying God refused to be the exclusive property of the Sadducees. The ordinary people who followed Jesus understood that he represented a different understanding of God. This message of inclusion becomes even clearer when Jesus is later confronted by a single scribe (12:28). In answer to the scribe’s question on the most important laws, Jesus summarised the theological ethic of his gospel: love of God and love of neighbour (12:29-31). Inclusion, not exclusion Those who would exclude homosexuals from God’s kingdom choose to ignore Jesus, turning instead to the Old Testament – most particularly to Genesis 19, the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Their interpretation of the story is that it is about homosexuality. It isn’t. It relates to hospitality. The story begins in Genesis 18 when three visitors (God and two angels, appearing as “men”) came before Abraham, a Hebrew patriarch. What did Abraham and his wife Sarah do? They offered hospitality. The two angels then left Abraham and the Lord and travelled into Sodom (19:1) where they met Lot, Abraham’s nephew. What did Lot do? He offered hospitality. The two incidents of hospitality are explained in exactly the same language. The “men of Sodom” (19:4), as the Bible describes them, didn’t offer the same hospitality to these angels in disguise. Instead they sought to humiliate them (and Lot (19:9)) by threatening to rape them. We know they were heterosexual because Lot, in attempting to protect himself and his guests, offered his virgin daughters to them (19:8). Heterosexual rape of men by men is a common act of humiliation. This is an extreme form of inhospitality. The story contrasts extreme hospitality (Abraham and Lot) with the extreme inhospitality of the men of Sodom. It is a story of inclusion, not exclusion. Abraham and Lot included the strangers; the men of Sodom excluded them. Clothed in Christ When confronted by the inclusive gospel of Jesus and a careful reading of the story of Sodom as one about hospitality, those who disavow Pope Francis’s approach will likely jump to other Scriptures. Why? Because they have a patriarchal agenda and are looking for any Scripture that might support their position. But the other Scriptures they use also require careful reading. Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, for example, are not about “homosexuality” as we now understand it – as the caring, loving and sexual relationship between people of the same sex. These texts are about relationships that cross boundaries of purity (between clean and unclean) and ethnicity (Israelite and Canaanite). In Galatians 3:28 in the New Testament, Paul the apostle yearns for a Christian community where: There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. Paul built his theological argument on the Jew-Greek distinction, but then extended it to the slave-free distinction and the male-female distinction. Christians – no matter which church they belong to – should follow Paul and extend it to the heterosexual-homosexual distinction. We are all “clothed in Christ” (3:27😞 God only sees Christ, not our different sexualities. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. Like this article? Subscribe to our weekly newsletter. It was written by: Gerald West, University of KwaZulu-Natal. It says nothing. The word is a 1946 construct. To think that the bible condemns same sex relationships is just lazy and uninformed. Like Southern Baptists and Evangelical Christianity.

Thanks for the dose of freaking stupid today. Being from Rural Heflin, AL, I can tell you, for a fact and from experience, that country folk wish they worked half as hard You should stop projecting mate.

Three more losses coming. 12 loss team. This team is the most stupid I have seen. They are just bloody stupid and soft

This team is sheit Absolute sheit

Ask Gonzaga

Wow. This is just an awful team. Some real brain dead decisions and play

If this Auburn team were disciplined and didn't go spastic between the ears, the fouls situation would be different. These guys can't handle a good big man.