Rep. Alvin Holmes
The amount was increased by more than seven-fold by state Rep. Alvin Holmes, D-Montgomery, after he originally took to the House floor this week to declare, "I've got $700 here, and I will give anyone this $700 if they come up and show me in this Bible where it says that marriage is between a man and a woman."
What's the background on Rep. Alvin Holmes, D-Montgomery?
Is he an idiot?
Woul he like this in the original languages? (ie greek?)
This way he can't play games with the transaltion.
The point is not whether he will pay, every one knows this democrat has no intention of paying. However the mere offer will be bootstrap cited repeatedly.
It is big lie theory in action.
This dude can't be reasoned with.A lady gave him a Bible with the passages highlighted and he still ....is an idiot.Down here in South Alabama the 'D' stands for DipStick.He's a Loser
Think he has a permit to operate a game of chance?
INTREP - Why not have him show us where same-sex marriage is natural and acceptable to God?
Marriage was instituted in Paradise when man was in innocence ( Gen 2:18-24).
Here we have its original charter, which was confirmed by our Lord, as the basis on which all regulations are to be framed ( Mat 19:4,5).
It is evident that monogamy was the original law of marriage ( Mat 19:5; 1Cr 6:16). This law was violated in after times, when corrupt usages began to be introduced ( Gen 4:19; 6:2).
We meet with the prevalence of polygamy and concubinage in the patriarchal age ( Gen 16:1-4; 22:21-24; 28:8,9; 29:23-30, etc.).
Polygamy was acknowledged in the Mosaic law and made the basis of legislation, and continued to be practiced all down through the period of Jewish history to the Captivity, after which there is no instance of it on record.
It seems to have been the practice from the beginning for fathers to select wives for their sons ( Gen 24:3; 38:6). Sometimes also proposals were initiated by the father of the maiden ( Exd 2:21). The brothers of the maiden were also sometimes consulted ( Gen 24:51; 34:11), but her own consent was not required. The young man was bound to give a price to the father of the maiden ( 31:15; 34:12; Exd 22:16,17; 1Sa 18:23,25; Rth 4:10; Hsa 3:2) On these patriarchal customs the Mosaic law made no change.
In the pre-Mosaic times, when the proposals were accepted and the marriage price given, the bridegroom could come at once and take away his bride to his own house ( Gen 24:63-67). But in general the marriage was celebrated by a feast in the house of the bride's parents, to which all friends were invited ( 29:22,27); and on the day of the marriage the bride, concealed under a thick veil, was conducted to her future husband's home.
Our Lord and savior Jesus Christ of Nazereth corrected many false notions then existing on the subject of marriage ( Mat 22:23-30), and placed it as a divine institution on the highest grounds (Mark 10;6-9).
The apostles state clearly and enforce the nuptial duties of husband and wife ( Eph 5:22-33; Col 3:18,19; 1Pe 3:1-7). Marriage is said to be "honourable" ( Hbr 13:4), and the prohibition of it is noted as one of the marks of degenerate times ( 1Ti 4:3).
The marriage relation is used to represent the union between God and his people ( Isa 54:5; Jer 3:1-14; Hsa 2:9,20). In the New Testament the same figure is employed in representing the love of Christ to his saints ( Eph 5:25-27). The Church of the redeemed is the "Bride, the Lamb's wife" ( Rev 19:7-9).
If you want on/off the ping list see my profile page.
10 to 1 says this POS Alabama lawmaker crawfishes on this bet.
Rep. Alvin Holmes
It will not matter what scripture you give him, he will not be convinced. 1 Corinthians 2:14
What do you mean "My interpretation isn't credible? I'll call the ACLU..."
Where's my check, Alvy?
The bible is full of imprecations against homosexuality but the technicality he's playing on is that the bible does not forbid a sexless homosexual "marriage"