Dear Steele,

WOW!

Steeleredux,
Could you please provide a link to where you copied this from ?

Dear Steele,

One can only hope for a good discussion.
Hopefully people like Banjo Paterson and others will
join in. You've made a good start though.

>"hate the sin and love the sinner".

But why is it always the genitals they go on about ? Why not the bits prohibiting the eating of shellfish as an example. Why wasn't Izzy down at the docks pleading with fishermen not to bring in the shellfish catch because it's an abomination ? Leviticus (amongst others) prohibits us from the eating of shellfish.

Exodus 21:7 says can sell my daughters into slavery, so why wasn't Izzy protesting and picketing in front of parliament to allow that to happen ? I don't want him to break the law of course but he could at least show he's faithful to the bible, not too much to ask ?

Leviticus again states that I can buy slaves as long as they are from neighbouring states, does this mean I can get Kiwis as slave ? Why isn't Izzy insisting upon that ?

My suspicion is it has nothing to do with religion at all, how do I know this ? because everything else that's not done.

As to cancel culture, it seems to me a bunch of folks organisising and successfully insisting upon a certain action is how it's supposed to work ? Are you envious becasue they are successful ?

Valley Guy,
You should check on the biblical definition of 'Slave'.

.

Dear Graham,

.

The paradox of the New Testament narrative is that as a constitutive “person” of the Trinity, Jesus of Nazareth (God the Son), could not die because he was just as equally God as the two other constitutive “persons”, God the Father and God the Holy Ghost.

As God the Son, Jesus would have been immortal, in which case he would never die and, therefore, never resurrect. On the other hand, the man Jesus could die but he would not have been able to resurrect because, unlike God the Son, human beings are mortal.

Saul of Tarsus (St Paul, the apostle) suggested (in 1 Corinthians 15:44 and Philippians 3:20–21) that the resurrection body was not the natural (physical) body of the man Jesus but the "spiritual" body of God the Son.

If that were the case, then what on earth happened to the natural (physical) body of the man, Jesus ? Saul remains silent on that. Nor does he attempt to explain why it disappeared in the first place. If it was only God the Son’s “spiritual” body that resurrected, why worry about the man Jesus’ natural (physical) body at all ?

If the duality of God and man in the earthly life of Jesus of Nazareth is difficult to conceive, it seems to me even more difficult to conceive of his (their) death and resurrection.

The ineffability of the Christian dogma of the Trinity (not to mention its logical impossibility) that the three persons of the Godhead are one – is second only to the ineffability of the alleged resurrection of the man-God, Jesus of Nazareth.

Perhaps the love-hate duality you mention in your article is just another manifestation of the inherent intricacies and complexities of our Christian culture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Rf3WK_IJ1g&ab_channel=TheTabernacleChoiratTempleSquare

.