Tuis » Algemeen » Koeitjies & kalfies » Is dit Naasteliefde?
 Is dit Naasteliefde? [boodskap #104974] |
Fri, 12 August 2005 05:04  |
Annette
Boodskappe: 11112
Geregistreer: August 2003
Karma: 1
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
Gaan oor die predikant/kerkraad/gemeente wat die heel bekwame
musiekonderwyser ( wat nie 'n lid van die gemeente is nie, en wat
musieklesse by die kerk aangebied het) af te dank omdat hy homoseksueel is.
--
Groetnis
Annette
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is dit Naasteliefde? [boodskap #104975 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #104974] |
Fri, 12 August 2005 06:43  |
PietR
Boodskappe: 3341
Geregistreer: July 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
Van die os op die jas, waarom is gay-wees 'n issue? Ek meen nou maar, as
'n ou man jong meisietjies verkies, of 'n ou vrou jong mannetjies, die een
ou nie van strippers af kan wegbly nie, of wat ook al, hulle hang dit nie
aan die groot klok nie en is dit nie eers ter sprake by hul werk
nie.....WANT NIEMAND WEET NIE! Met homoseksuele is dit duidelik anders.
Hulle blaker die storie juis in die publiek uit en dit máák dit 'n issue.
Niemand sou geweet het as die homo dit nie self bekend gemaak het nie en my
vraag aan jou is: Hoekom? Hoekom is dit vir die homoseksueel nodig dat
die algemene publiek van hul private voorkeure weet? EN, as iemand van die
publiek nie daarvan hou nie, hoekom is hulle kwaad? Hulle eien hulleself
[en soos sekerlik enige ander mens op geregtig is ook] die reg toe om hul
voorkeure uit te leef en nee dankie te sê vir 'n heteroseksuele lewe, maar
as iemand nie daarvan hou nie, dan is hy bevooroordeeld?
"Annette" skryf in boodskap news:ddhamp$aeq$2@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
> Gaan oor die predikant/kerkraad/gemeente wat die heel bekwame
> musiekonderwyser ( wat nie 'n lid van die gemeente is nie, en wat
> musieklesse by die kerk aangebied het) af te dank omdat hy homoseksueel
> is.
> --
> Groetnis
> Annette
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is dit Naasteliefde? [boodskap #104986 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #104974] |
Fri, 12 August 2005 11:12 |
Ferdi Greyling
Boodskappe: 1232
Geregistreer: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
Ek het gou op die net gaan soek na Bybel-verwysings na Sodom en die
volgende gekry van 'n site wat dit uitwys dat daar geen verwysing na
homoseksualiteit is nie.
( http://home.wanadoo.nl/inspiritus/all%20the%20anti-gay%20tex ts.htm)
For what it is worth:
Genesis 13:13
"But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord
exceedingly."
(No homosexuality mentioned here)
Genesis 18:20
"And the Lord said: Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is
great, and because their sin is very grievous."
(No homosexuality mentioned here)
Genesis 19:13
"For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen
great before the face of the Lord."
(No homosexuality mentioned here)
Deuteronomy 29:17-26
"And ye have seen their abominations, and their idols, wood and
stone, silver and gold, which were among them...And that the whole
land thereof is brimstone, and salt, and burning...like the overthrow
of Sodom...which the Lord overthrew in his anger, and in his
wrath...Wherefore hath the Lord done thus unto this land? What meaneth
the heat of this great anger? Then men shall say: Because they have
forsaken the covenant of the Lord God of their fathers...For they went
and served other gods, and worshipped them, gods whom they knew not,
and whom he had not given unto them."
(Just idolatry and false gods, no homosexuality mentioned here)
Deuteronomy 32:32-38
"For their vine is of the vine of Sodom, and of the fields of
Gomorrah: their grapes are grapes of gall, their clusters are
bitter...And he shall say: Where are their gods, their rock in whom
they trusted, Which did eat the fat of their sacrifices, and drank the
wine of their drink offerings? Let them rise up and help you, and be
your protection."
(Idolatry again; but, no homosexuality mentioned.)
Isaiah 1:9-23
"Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant,
we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto
Gomorrah. Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto
the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah...How is the faithful city
become an harlot! It was full of judgement; righteousness lodged in
it; but now murderers. Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with
water: Thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves: every
one loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards: they judge not the
fatherless, neither doth the cause of the widow come unto them."
(Murder, greed, thievery, rebelliousness, covetousness; no
homosexuality there)
Isaiah 3:8-15
"For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen: because their
tongue and their doings are against the Lord, to provoke the eyes of
his glory. The shew of their countenance doth witness against them;
and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their
soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves. For ye have eaten
up the vineyard; the spoil of the poor is in your houses. What mean ye
that ye beat my people to pieces, and grind the faces of the poor?"
(Mistreating the poor. Still no homosexuality...)
Isaiah 13:11-19
"And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for
their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease,
and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible...And Babylon, the
glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, shall be as
when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah."
(Haughtiness, yes, but no homosexuality.)
Isaiah 3:8-15
"For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen: because their
tongue and their doings are against the Lord, to provoke the eyes of
his glory. The shew of their countenance doth witness against them;
and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their
soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves. For ye have eaten
up the vineyard; the spoil of the poor is in your houses. What mean ye
that ye beat my people to pieces, and grind the faces of the poor?"
(Again, the mistreating of the poor is mentioned. And again, no
mention of homosexuality.)
Isaiah 13:11-19
"And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for
their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease,
and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible...And Babylon, the
glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, shall be as
when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah."
(Haughtiness again, but no homosexuality.)
Jeremiah 23:10-14
"For the land is full of adulterers; for because of swearing the
land mourneth...For both prophet and priest are profane; yea, in my
house have I found their wickedness, saith the Lord...And I have seen
folly in the prophets of Samaria; they prophesied in Baal, and caused
my people Israel to err. I have seen also in the prophets of Jerusalem
an horrible thing: they commit adultery, and walk in lies: they
strengthen also the hands of evildoers, that none doth return from his
wickedness: they are all of them unto me as Sodom, and the inhabitants
thereof as Gomorrah."
(Adultery, lying by priests and prophets; nope, no homosexuality)
Jeremiah 49:16-18
"Thy terribleness hath deceived thee, and the pride of thine
heart...Also Edom shall be a desolation: every one that goeth by it
shall be astonished, and shall hiss at all the plagues thereof. As in
the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah."
(Evil and pride, but still no homosexuality...)
Jeremiah 50:2-40
"Declare ye among the nations...say, Babylon is taken, Bel is
confounded, Merodach is broken in pieces; her idols are confounded,
her images are broken in pieces...thou hast striven against the
Lord...for she hath been proud against the Lord...As God overthrew
Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighbor cities thereof, saith the Lord; so
shall no man abide there, neither shall any son of man dwell therein."
(There's that idolatry and pride again, but still no
homosexuality.)
Lamentations 4:3-6
"...the daughter of my people is become cruel, like the ostriches
in the wilderness. The tongue of the sucking child cleaveth to the
roof of his mouth for thirst: the young children ask bread, and no man
breaketh it unto them. They that did feed delicately are desolate in
the streets: they that were brought up in scarlet embrace dunghills.
For the punishment of the iniquity of the daughter of my people is
greater than the punishment of the sin of Sodom, that was overthrown
as in a moment, and no hands stayed on her."
(Cruelty, failure to tend the young and the poor... Homosexuality
appears to be a "no show".)
Ezekiel 16:49-50
"Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride,
fullness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her
daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.
And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore
I took them away as I saw good."
(Well THAT's pretty clear, huh? But what are we missing in that
list? Oh yeah...homosexuality.)
Amos 4:1-11
"Hear this word, ye kine of Bashan, that are in the mountain of
Samaria, which oppress the poor, which crush the needy, which say to
their masters, Bring, and let us drink. I have overthrown some of you,
as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and ye were as a firebrand
plucked out of the burning: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith
the Lord."
(Oppression, mistreating the needy...still no homosexuality)
Zephaniah 2:8-9
"I have heard the reproach of Moab, and the revilings of the
children of Ammon, whereby they have reproached my people, and
magnified themselves against their border. Therefore as I live, saith
the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Surely Moab shall be as Sodom,
and the children of Ammon as Gomorrah...This shall they have for their
pride, because they have reproached and magnified themselves against
the people of the Lord of hosts."
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 07:04:49 +0200, "Annette" wrote:
> Gaan oor die predikant/kerkraad/gemeente wat die heel bekwame
> musiekonderwyser ( wat nie 'n lid van die gemeente is nie, en wat
> musieklesse by die kerk aangebied het) af te dank omdat hy homoseksueel is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is dit Naasteliefde? [boodskap #104999 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #104980] |
Fri, 12 August 2005 13:53 |
basjan[1]
Boodskappe: 315
Geregistreer: August 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
"Ferdi Greyling" skryf in boodskap news:a8tof1pr7diuuplafopt5spoo77p6oqu5c@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 07:04:49 +0200, "Annette"
> wrote:
>
> > musiekonderwyser ( wat nie 'n lid van die gemeente is nie, en wat
>> musieklesse by die kerk aangebied het) af te dank omdat hy homoseksueel
>> is.
>
> Dit laat my met die volgende vrae:
>
> Waar en wanneer het die Christelike God gese homoseksualiteit is
> verkeerd?
> En as dit is, hoekom het hy mense dan so gemaak?
Romans 1:26-27: "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: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman,
burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is
unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence [sic] of their error
which was meet."
The King James Version of the Bible translates verse 9 and 10 as:
1Corithians 6:9-10: "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit
the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor
thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall
inherit the kingdom of God." (Emphasis ours)
This verse has been translated in many ways among the 25 English versions of
the Bible that we have analyzed. The two activities of interest here have
been variously translated as:
effeminate. In the English language, this covers a wide range of male
behavior such as being unmanly, lacking virility. One might think of the
characters "John," the receptionist on NYPD Blue, or "Jack" on Will and
Grace.
homosexuals, variously described as: "men who practice homosexuality,"
(ESV);
"those who participate in homosexuality," (Amplified);
"abusers of themselves with men," (KJV);
"practicing homosexuals," (NAB);
"homosexuals," (NASB, CSB, NKJ, The Great Book: The New Testament
in Plain English);
"homosexual perversion," (NEB);
"homosexual offenders," (NIV);
"liers with mankind," (Rhiems); and
"homosexual perverts." (TEV)
Text of 1 Timothy 1:9-10:
The King James Version (KJV) of the Bible translates verse 9 and
10 as:
"Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man,
but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for
unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for
manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind,
for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other
thing that is contrary to sound doctrine." (Emphasis ours)
Sonder om in 'n eeu-oue debat betrokke te raak, (van) die mens het so
GEKIES, 'n voorreg (vrye keuse) wat God die mens nog altyd toegelaat het.
MAAR jou keuse is nie noodwendig suiwer nie.
Groete
Basjan
begin 666 topbul1d.gif
M1TE&.#EA#P`/`'
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is dit Naasteliefde? [boodskap #105003 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #104999] |
Fri, 12 August 2005 14:12 |
Ferdi Greyling
Boodskappe: 1232
Geregistreer: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:53:21 +0200, "Basjan" wrote:
>> Waar en wanneer het die Christelike God gese homoseksualiteit is
>> verkeerd?
>> En as dit is, hoekom het hy mense dan so gemaak?
>
> Romans 1:26-27: "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: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman,
> burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is
> unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence [sic] of their error
> which was meet."
Romans 1:26 and 27, at first glance, appears to condemn gay and
lesbian activity. Paul criticizes sexual activity which is against a
person's nature or disposition. But in Greek society of the time,
homosexuality and bisexuality was regarded as a natural activity for
some people. Thus Paul might have been criticizing heterosexuals who
were engaged in homosexual activities against their nature. He might
not be referring to homosexuals or bisexuals at all.
The verses preceding 26 might indicate that he was referring to sexual
acts associated with idol worship. The verse is too vague to be
interpreted as a blanket prohibition of all same-sex activities
------------------------------------
Besides, dis Paulus wat dit gese het.
Hy is mos nie God nie?
Hy was mos net 'n mens?!
Sonder om in 'n eeu-oue debat betrokke te raak, (van) die mens het
so
> GEKIES, 'n voorreg (vrye keuse) wat God die mens nog altyd toegelaat het.
> MAAR jou keuse is nie noodwendig suiwer nie.
So jy se (jy weet) God laat die mens toe om sy seksualiteit te kies?
Hoe weet jy van die vrye keuse?
Waar staan dit in die Bybel?
Of is dit JOU afleiding om teenstrydighede te verklaar?
Glo jy dat die aard van atome voorspelbaar is? Volgens die fisika? Met
ander woorde dat jy kan voorspel waar 'n kanonkoeel kan val? Met ander
woorde dat jy die waarskynlikheid kan voorspel waar 'n elektron hom
sal bevind op 'n gegewe tyd?
En is ons saamgestel uit atome?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is dit Naasteliefde? [boodskap #105004 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #105003] |
Fri, 12 August 2005 14:23 |
basjan[1]
Boodskappe: 315
Geregistreer: August 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
"Ferdi Greyling" skryf in boodskap news:i7bpf15i5pmkqs585n3cf7jp8n63vr89lc@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:53:21 +0200, "Basjan" wrote:
>
> Waar en wanneer het die Christelike God gese homoseksualiteit is
>>> verkeerd?
>>> En as dit is, hoekom het hy mense dan so gemaak?
>> Romans 1:26-27: "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: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman,
>> burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which
>> is
>> unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence [sic] of their error
>> which was meet."
>
> Romans 1:26 and 27, at first glance, appears to condemn gay and
> lesbian activity. Paul criticizes sexual activity which is against a
> person's nature or disposition. But in Greek society of the time,
> homosexuality and bisexuality was regarded as a natural activity for
> some people. Thus Paul might have been criticizing heterosexuals who
> were engaged in homosexual activities against their nature. He might
> not be referring to homosexuals or bisexuals at all.
>
> The verses preceding 26 might indicate that he was referring to sexual
> acts associated with idol worship. The verse is too vague to be
> interpreted as a blanket prohibition of all same-sex activities
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Besides, dis Paulus wat dit gese het.
> Hy is mos nie God nie?
> Hy was mos net 'n mens?!
Dis hier waar ons paaie divergeer: Ek glo aan 'n God-geïnspireerde Bybel.
Mense wat hiermee 'n probleem het sê "hoe weet ek dit?". Ek GLO.
> > MAAR jou keuse is nie noodwendig suiwer nie.
>
> So jy se (jy weet) God laat die mens toe om sy seksualiteit te kies?
Gaan lees asb. weer die verse. Dit dui op (1) 'n natuurlike neiging en (2)
'n afwyking van die natuurlike, m.a.w. 'n abnormaliteit.
> Hoe weet jy van die vrye keuse?
> Waar staan dit in die Bybel?
Die Bybel is deurspek daarvan. Begin voor en lees. Jy kan vb. "of vir of
teen God kies". God dwing jou nie om vir Hom te kies nie.
> Of is dit JOU afleiding om teenstrydighede te verklaar?
Grootword ouboet. Ons is weer terug by die begin van die sirkel. As ek
iets glo, is dit my reg. Ironies hoe 'n sekere groep hulle die reg toe-eien
om my afkeur te veroordeel.
> Glo jy dat die aard van atome voorspelbaar is? Volgens die fisika? Met
> ander woorde dat jy kan voorspel waar 'n kanonkoeel kan val? Met ander
> woorde dat jy die waarskynlikheid kan voorspel waar 'n elektron hom
> sal bevind op 'n gegewe tyd?
Weer divergeer ons: Natuurlik kan jy al my fisiese (chemiese) komponente
kwantifiseer. Maar glo jy regig dat ons net die fisiese is? Al glo jy nie
aan God nie, glo jy regtig dat jy net jou fisiese hoeveelheid is?
Basjan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is dit Naasteliefde? [boodskap #105015 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #104975] |
Sat, 13 August 2005 05:09 |
Annette
Boodskappe: 11112
Geregistreer: August 2003
Karma: 1
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
Die punt is, in hierdie spesifieke geval, dat die betrokke homoseksueel dit
nie uitgeblaker het nie. 'n Gemeentelid het glo uitgevind dat hy saam met 'n
ander man bly, en die dominee geskakel. Die dominee/kerkraad/gemeente het
dit aan die groot klok gehang.
Die afgedankte gaan hul hof toe sleep vir R100,000.
Hy het 'n baie goeie kans om dit te kry.
Die man lei nie 'n promiskue leefwyse nie, dus op daardie punt het die
veroordeeldes dit in die eerste plek verkeerd.
Verder word ander (gesiene) gerespekteerde gemeentelede nie uit die kerk
gesit of uit poste afgedank as dit bekend sou word dat hulle promisku leef,
daar geweld in die gesin is, of selfs as die persone groot witboordmisdade
pleeg nie - inteendeel, sulke mense word aangemoedig om kerk toe te kom om
"gehelp" te word.
--
Groetnis
Annette
Life is uncertain - eat dessert first
ann...@ctnet.co.za
"Suidwester" skryf in boodskap news:OOidndQD0peJ2GHfRVn-hg@is.co.za...
> Van die os op die jas, waarom is gay-wees 'n issue? Ek meen nou maar, as
> 'n ou man jong meisietjies verkies, of 'n ou vrou jong mannetjies, die een
> ou nie van strippers af kan wegbly nie, of wat ook al, hulle hang dit nie
> aan die groot klok nie en is dit nie eers ter sprake by hul werk
> nie.....WANT NIEMAND WEET NIE! Met homoseksuele is dit duidelik anders.
> Hulle blaker die storie juis in die publiek uit en dit máák dit 'n issue.
> Niemand sou geweet het as die homo dit nie self bekend gemaak het nie en my
> vraag aan jou is: Hoekom? Hoekom is dit vir die homoseksueel nodig dat
> die algemene publiek van hul private voorkeure weet? EN, as iemand van die
> publiek nie daarvan hou nie, hoekom is hulle kwaad? Hulle eien hulleself
> [en soos sekerlik enige ander mens op geregtig is ook] die reg toe om hul
> voorkeure uit te leef en nee dankie te sê vir 'n heteroseksuele lewe, maar
> as iemand nie daarvan hou nie, dan is hy bevooroordeeld?
> "Annette" wrote in message
> news:ddhamp$aeq$2@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
>> Gaan oor die predikant/kerkraad/gemeente wat die heel bekwame
>> musiekonderwyser ( wat nie 'n lid van die gemeente is nie, en wat
>> musieklesse by die kerk aangebied het) af te dank omdat hy homoseksueel
>> is.
>> --
>> Groetnis
>> Annette
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is dit Naasteliefde? [boodskap #105018 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #104985] |
Sat, 13 August 2005 07:14 |
PietR
Boodskappe: 3341
Geregistreer: July 2003
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
100% reg. Die een ou kan 'n 100m in minder as 9 sekondes hardloop, die
ander skop balle ver, die ander is 'n genie [definitief nie 'n koerantman
nie!], maar die mens is ontwerp vir die man om die vrou te bevrug, want die
mensdom moet voortplant. Dis die basiese doel van enige mens of dier.
Hoe wil jy voortplant as mannetjie op mannetjie en vroutjie of vroutjie
kuier? Dis nie normaal nie. Dis 'n afwyking en een wat in 'n mens
ingeteel kan word.
Het jy al ooit daaraan gedink hoekom kry jy sterk sportgesinne se
kinders wat ook uitstaande in sport is? Enige gemiddelde ou kan oefen dat
die snot spat en hy sal nooit 'n top sportman wees nie want hy het sekere
basiese dinge wat net toppresteerders beskore is. As albei ouers hierdie
eienskappe het, dan is die kans veel groter dat die telgies ook dit gaan hê.
Homoseksualiteit? Ginetiese afwyking. Hoekom? Omdat mense nie
geselekteer word vir teling soos bees of skaap nie. Soos Hitler dit wou
doen! Die feit dat die mens 'n eie verstand het, maak Hitler se idees
totaal onaanvaarbaar, maar nie minder reg in die sin dat hy 'n sterker en
slimmer volk sou kon teel nie.
"Ferdi Greyling" skryf in boodskap news:ce0pf15ei6d6p8cv1oh74l4r0nifb8e63k@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 11:23:36 +0100, "Suidwester"
> wrote:
>
>
> As God almagtig is en as ons en ons wereld sy skepping is, het hy ons
> gemaak wat ons is.
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is dit Naasteliefde? [boodskap #105022 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #105018] |
Sat, 13 August 2005 10:08 |
Annette
Boodskappe: 11112
Geregistreer: August 2003
Karma: 1
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
Ek het al met homoseksuele honde te doen gehad.
1) Sou dit hul keuse gewees het?
2) Sou hulle nie ook "ontwerp" gewees het om voort te plant nie?
--
Groetnis
Annette
"Suidwester" wrote in message
news:iOadnZ2dnZ3yQ1H2nZ2dnVIAYN-dnZ2dRVn-zJ2dnZ0@is.co.za...
> 100% reg. Die een ou kan 'n 100m in minder as 9 sekondes hardloop, die
> ander skop balle ver, die ander is 'n genie [definitief nie 'n koerantman
> nie!], maar die mens is ontwerp vir die man om die vrou te bevrug, want die
> mensdom moet voortplant. Dis die basiese doel van enige mens of dier.
> Hoe wil jy voortplant as mannetjie op mannetjie en vroutjie of vroutjie
> kuier? Dis nie normaal nie. Dis 'n afwyking en een wat in 'n mens
> ingeteel kan word.
> Het jy al ooit daaraan gedink hoekom kry jy sterk sportgesinne se
> kinders wat ook uitstaande in sport is? Enige gemiddelde ou kan oefen dat
> die snot spat en hy sal nooit 'n top sportman wees nie want hy het sekere
> basiese dinge wat net toppresteerders beskore is. As albei ouers hierdie
> eienskappe het, dan is die kans veel groter dat die telgies ook dit gaan hê.
> Homoseksualiteit? Ginetiese afwyking. Hoekom? Omdat mense nie
> geselekteer word vir teling soos bees of skaap nie. Soos Hitler dit wou
> doen! Die feit dat die mens 'n eie verstand het, maak Hitler se idees
> totaal onaanvaarbaar, maar nie minder reg in die sin dat hy 'n sterker en
> slimmer volk sou kon teel nie.
> "Ferdi Greyling" wrote in message
> news:ce0pf15ei6d6p8cv1oh74l4r0nifb8e63k@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 11:23:36 +0100, "Suidwester"
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> As God almagtig is en as ons en ons wereld sy skepping is, het hy ons
>> gemaak wat ons is.
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is dit Naasteliefde? [boodskap #105023 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #105019] |
Sat, 13 August 2005 10:14 |
Annette
Boodskappe: 11112
Geregistreer: August 2003
Karma: 1
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
Wel, die inligting is nie baie voor die hand liggend nie, maar ek vermoed
dat, toe hy aangestel is, of 'n onderhoud met hom gevoer is, dat om
homoseksueel te wees nie een van die voorwaardes was om hom uit te sluit om
die orrel te speel, of kinders in musiek op te lei nie.
Anders sou hulle hom mos by voorbaat afgekeur het voordat die keuring
plaasgevind het?
Nou beweer die kerk dat hulle hom nie afgedank het omdat hy homoseksueel is
nie, maar omdat hy saam met 'n ander man bly.
Hoo Boy!!! Dis die definitiewe einde van alle seuns- en manskoshuise!!
Terloops, sover dit my kennis strek, is daar bitter min pedofiele wat
homoseksueel is.
Die studente sou baie veiliger by die musikant se klasse gewees het as byv
die katkisasieklas.:)
--
Groetnis
Annette
"Suidwester" skryf in boodskap news:LqOdnSTwB7uxPWDfRVn-vA@is.co.za...
> Ek verstaan wat jy sê, maar ek dink dat enige mens wat homoseksueel is, tog
> moet weet dat dit vir 'n groot deel van die samelewing nie heeltemal
> aanvaarbaar is nie? Reg of verkeerd, die gewone ou op straat is ongemaklik
> daarmee. So sal daar die meerderheid van mense in 'n kerk wees wat nie
> daarmee wil saamleef nie en hulle het mos 'n keuse om so te maak as hulle
> wil? Net soos die homo die reg het om sy keuse uit te leef, net so het
> ander mense die reg om hulle voorkeure uit te leef.
> Die betrokke man moes vir seker geweet het dat die kerkmense gaan nie te
> opgeklits wees met sy gay-geid nie? Dat, as dit bekend word, hy dalk sal
> moet verdamp? Hoekom het hy nie gaan orrel speel in 'n gemeente van gay
> mense nie?
> "Annette" wrote in message
> news:ddk0aj$jm5$1@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
>> Die punt is, in hierdie spesifieke geval, dat die betrokke homoseksueel
>> dit
>> nie uitgeblaker het nie. 'n Gemeentelid het glo uitgevind dat hy saam met
>> 'n
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is dit Naasteliefde? [boodskap #105026 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #105013] |
Sat, 13 August 2005 12:38 |
Waaierstertmuis
Boodskappe: 1592
Geregistreer: October 2001
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
"@rogers.com" skryf:
> Alhoewel beide boeke se fisika effens outdated is, is
> hulle uitwys van ooreenkomste met die oosterse
> konsep van sunyata en die daarmeegaande konsep
> van "dependent origination." Verstaan jy die konsep?
Ek verstaan dalk ietwat meer meer van Kant en die res van die
transcendental tradisie se sienswyses hieroor. As 'n Westerling maak
dit vir my baie meer sin as die westerse interpretasies van die
Oosterse meesters.
"No entity without identity" in 'n neutedop.
Soos ek dit verstaan is die basiese doktrine van sunyata: nothing
arises; no thing (entity, existent) is.
Terloops, die denkwyse/konsep is ook nie uniek aan Buddhisme nie. Ek
het so jaar of wat gelede toe Tobie nog hier deelgeneem het, en hy
eenkeer iets gepos het van 'n redelike bekende Christen, ook daarop
reageer.
Elkgeval, ek bly steeds van mening dat die groep Buddhiste of enige
ander geloof, wat wetenskaplike teorieë en feite soos veral kwantum
fisika meng, na die naaste zendo gemarsjeer moet word, en tussen die
oë geskiet word. Op 'n vreedsame manier natuurlik.
;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Bladsye (9): [1 ] |
  |
Gaan na forum:
[ XML-voer ] [  ]
Tyd nou: Fri Mar 14 20:49:10 UTC 2025
|
Supertaal
Blog
Soek
Hulp
Lede
Registreer
Teken aan
Tuis
