Quick Silver's page

I don't have anymore time, but I hope that I've been able to add to the discussion. Hopefully I will be back again.

You do know the origins of the KJV.

Actually the KJV was not written so that King James could divorce his wife, and King James relationship to his wife is of subject anyway, the King James Bible was written using texts written in the original language, and to this day, it has not been proven inaccurate. i.e. the dead sea scrolls, which matched perfectly to the Old Testament manuscripts used in the translating of the KJV, And the KJV speak out against divorse, if King James had written for the purpose of finding a loop hole, wouldn't he remove the references to divorce being wrong?

Why is your interpretation of the Bible right, and theirs wrong?

As a Bible believing Christian, I believe in the plenary inspiration of the Bible in the original texts. This means that I believe that every word was inspired by God, and that the writers wrote, as they were moved of the Holy Spirit, 2Ti 3:16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God," I believe that the originals although long gone now, are accuratly represented in the textus reseptus i.e. KJV. This is why I can be sure that my interpretation is correct.

The question is all in what is meant by "natural."

To answer that question based on the Biblical understanding, I would then suggest that we look at the Biblical begining, Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Again please do not be offended, I am only speaking as to the Biblical stand.

There are reasons Christians these days no longer follow the laws of Leviticus, mostly because Jesus came along and changed the subject. Picking and chosing from those laws to say the Bible is against homosexuality is not about Jesus and the Bible and What God Wants Us To Do With Our Naughty Bits, as much as it is about your agenda, I think.

Jesus didn't come to change the subject, the law was given to show us that we could not be saved on our own, and that we needed Jesus to save us. No one keeps all the law, that is the point, no one can.

By no means am I trying to be sexist, please take no offense, but in the Christian faith, marriage is a symbol. When God first made marriage, He intended it to help us understand the relationship that we are to have with him. The church is refered to as the bride of Christ, and Israel was refered to in the Old Testement as the wife of God(i.e. Song of Solomon) This is why(and please take no offense) the Bible has a stand against homosexuality. It destroys the picture. It places us on the same level as God, in that both are the same.

I don't get to take on the Bible-tooting, drunk-on-their-on-righteousness fruitcakes anymore like I used to have on Bourbon Street waiting for me any time I wanted. I miss giving verbal ass-whippings to people who don't understand how someone can have faith and science in their hearts with equal measure. These days I have to take my thrills cheap and wherever I can find them. :(

That was civil, but never the less, I didn't mean to break in on the discussion, I am sorry.

I did come in on the wrong post, and I am sorry, for the interruption.

Sorry, wrong post, but the relationship between the manand the woman represents the relationship between Jesus and his people. The husband is the head, even as Christ is the head of the Church, and gave himself for it.