|
On July 30 2013 06:22 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God  . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. Where exactly did Jesus say that homosexual sex is a sin?
Jesus defines marriage as between a man and a woman, and then says that all sex outside of marriage is sinful (adultery).
On July 30 2013 06:22 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. But I always hated that kind of interpretation. I have talked to many Christians who say they are fine with me being queer and they will pray for me, but it is so goddamn condescending and unpleasant and passive aggressive. And they say that we are all sinners and hate is bad, but you know damn well that they mean something different when addressing homosexuality.
You have injected that hate into them for your own reasons. You can say all you want that you know they mean something different, but perhaps that isn't true. I know that there are many homosexuals who are far better people than me, in the grand scheme of things, and are far more worthy in God's eyes. I cannot hate them for sinning any more than I can hate a child for lying. A child sins when he/she lies, but they are just a child. A homosexual sins when they have sex outside of marriage (marriage as defined by Christ), but so does any heterosexual who has sex outside of marriage. It is the same sin: adultery.
On July 30 2013 06:29 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. Yeah, well Protestants also interpret both Testaments and I don't agree that Jesus said homosexuality was a sin and neither does anyone in my church. I think some ass hole translated his teachings and added that line in because he was a bigot. After all, the church made a very good practice of "translating" the bible into modern text over the years and there is NO reason to believe Jesus's words came through unchanged. Also, the Catholics like to ingore the part of the old Testament that says we can't play football. And that makes slavery legal and allowable under god. Those parts they freely ignore. Or interpret as dumb.
As a Catholic, I would hold that the Protestants interpret the Bible incorrectly, but that is another argument. Certainly there is no Protestant church that has the experience that the Catholic Church possesses, nor the resources. And there is no reason to believe that the Catholic Church would allow mistranslations to occur when the penalty for such an action is clearly written in Revelations.
I am not familiar with any passage saying we can't play football, and no Catholics do not ignore or call dumb those passages outlining slavery. We interpret them.
|
On July 30 2013 06:31 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 06:22 Klondikebar wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. Where exactly did Jesus say that homosexual sex is a sin? Jesus defines marriage as between a man and a woman, and then says that all sex outside of marriage is sinful (adultery). Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 06:22 Shiragaku wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. But I always hated that kind of interpretation. I have talked to many Christians who say they are fine with me being queer and they will pray for me, but it is so goddamn condescending and unpleasant and passive aggressive. And they say that we are all sinners and hate is bad, but you know damn well that they mean something different when addressing homosexuality. You have injected that hate into them for your own reasons. You can say all you want that you know they mean something different, but perhaps that isn't true. I know that there are many homosexuals who are far better people than me, in the grand scheme of things, and are far more worthy in God's eyes. I cannot hate them for sinning any more than I can hate a child for lying. A child sins when he/she lies, but they are just a child. A homosexual sins when they have sex outside of marriage (marriage as defined by Christ), but so does any heterosexual who has sex outside of marriage. It is the same sin: adultery.
Except those actual sins you listed are choices. People choose to lie and commit adultery. People do not choose to be gay. I suppose you could go with "but they do choose to have gay sex" and then say that gay people can be gay they should just never have gay sex, but that's idiotic. If orientation isn't a choice then the direct expression of said orientation can't be a sin.
This line of logic "I love all sinners regardless of their sins" is just as condescending and stupid as all the others. It relies heavily on the notion that homosexuality is a choice. Which is a GIANT slap in the face to both science and the people who tortured themselves trying to be straight (guess they just didn't try hard enough?)
|
On July 30 2013 06:31 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 06:22 Klondikebar wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. Where exactly did Jesus say that homosexual sex is a sin? Jesus defines marriage as between a man and a woman, and then says that all sex outside of marriage is sinful (adultery). Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 06:22 Shiragaku wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. But I always hated that kind of interpretation. I have talked to many Christians who say they are fine with me being queer and they will pray for me, but it is so goddamn condescending and unpleasant and passive aggressive. And they say that we are all sinners and hate is bad, but you know damn well that they mean something different when addressing homosexuality. You have injected that hate into them for your own reasons. You can say all you want that you know they mean something different, but perhaps that isn't true. I know that there are many homosexuals who are far better people than me, in the grand scheme of things, and are far more worthy in God's eyes. I cannot hate them for sinning any more than I can hate a child for lying. A child sins when he/she lies, but they are just a child. A homosexual sins when they have sex outside of marriage (marriage as defined by Christ), but so does any heterosexual who has sex outside of marriage. It is the same sin: adultery. Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 06:29 Plansix wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. Yeah, well Protestants also interpret both Testaments and I don't agree that Jesus said homosexuality was a sin and neither does anyone in my church. I think some ass hole translated his teachings and added that line in because he was a bigot. After all, the church made a very good practice of "translating" the bible into modern text over the years and there is NO reason to believe Jesus's words came through unchanged. Also, the Catholics like to ingore the part of the old Testament that says we can't play football. And that makes slavery legal and allowable under god. Those parts they freely ignore. Or interpret as dumb. As a Catholic, I would hold that the Protestants interpret the Bible incorrectly, but that is another argument. Certainly there is no Protestant church that has the experience that the Catholic Church possesses, nor the resources. And there is no reason to believe that the Catholic Church would allow mistranslations to occur when the penalty for such an action is clearly written in Revelations. I am not familiar with any passage saying we can't play football, and no Catholics do not ignore or call dumb those passages outlining slavery. We interpret them.
Leviticus 11:8, "You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their(pigs) carcasses; they are unclean to you." -ie, we can't play football, or eat natural casing pork hotdogs. And interpret is a nice word for "ignore that which is politically unpopular at the time". And as no one in the Catholic Church is blessed with longer life than anyone else, so the of experience level for them is about the same as my small town church. Now, if you want to talk about the collective experience and history of the church, you could, but I don't think we really want to dive into the amazing history the Catholic Church.
|
On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable.
Actually, it's totally arguable since Jesus literally did not say that at all:
"He answered, “Have you not read that the one who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
This is in response to the question: “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause?”
Interpreting this as an implicit condemnation of homosexuality is interesting to me in a lot of ways, because you are twisting an answer to a specific kind of question and trying to make a universal out of it. No shit someone is going to reply to a question about men divorcing women by talking about marriage between men and women. Interpreting it as saying anything about homosexuality is like saying that, when Jesus says “Let the little children come to me, and do not stop them; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of heaven belongs” he's actually saying that nobody other than that particular group of first-century Jewish children is able to "own" the kingdom of heaven.
I mean, come on. What you're doing is practically the definition of taking a single verse and trying to interpret the universe from it. It's like "oh, Jesus didn't mention X? I guess that means he thought everything other than what he did mention is deplorable." This kind of exegesis is completely unsustainable because it doesn't work if you apply it to other passages. You can't just assume that when Jesus says anything he's making an exclusionary statement and giving a philosophical/theological/ethical definition that will stand all tests of time and is infallible. Like, that'd be ridiculous, because it'd totally invalidate the notion that Jesus was a human being who existed in a particular historical context (which is integral to his resurrection being important). Jesus was a Jewish man living in the first century. He was not immediately aware of every philosophical conundrum that would ever be invented, no more than he was aware of quantum mechanics.
Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays.
I agree. It's hating God for being such a total imbecile that God would deign it reasonable to create a large group of mentally stable adults that have sexual orientations identical to those possessed by everyone else (just differing in terms of target) and then saying "you know what, I've arbitrarily decide that this completely unchangeable, totally natural and healthy sexual orientation, which informs the identities of all these people, is basically useless, and that trying to participate in it is necessarily sinful. That makes no fucking sense. It's not like gay people are like "oh, man, I just can't stop having sex with the same sex!" It's that most people consider their sexuality to be a pretty fundamental part of their general identity. I know I do. I'd be a totally different person if I wasn't attracted to women, or if I was attracted to rocks instead. It's not something I can just isolate from myself, because it's part of who I am. Asking gay people to deny this (universally) when it is functionally equivalent to heterosexuality (in the sense that a homosexual man is somewhat like a heterosexual woman in terms of orientation) for no other reason than that "God said so" is absolutely and completely absurd.
The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners).
Okay, but I'm pretty sure the Catholic Church doesn't demand that, say, all men become priests and swear oaths of celibacy, because it recognizes that the denial of sexuality isn't something that all people are able (or willing) to do healthily. On the other hand, the CC asserts that homosexuals are universally called to be celibate, notwithstanding the fact that the same reasons we don't force straight people to be celibate (i.e. that it's pretty much impossible and that coercing someone to mute harmless sexual intercourse with consenting adults has negative effects on their mental health in the best of cases) all apply to homosexuals.
|
After having so many debate on religion regarding homosexuality or "immorality" and sins, I've come to the conclusion that Jesus/Bible/etc. says pretty much what the believer think it should say. You could pretty much find a justification for anything in the bible. After all, it is mostly interpretation and the person morality and belief will comes into play when trying to interpret it.
Saying that homosexuality is wrong because of the bible is a bad argument. In my mind it is just an excuse to allow themselves to be homophobic.
We shouldn't blame a religion itself, because you can be religious and easily accept homosexuality.
Saying that you love or accept homosexual, but then saying that they're sinner because of who they love is still homophobia and it is harmful, causes violence and some people even dies, sometime of suicide. From my point of view, if I was catholic, I would say that calling homosexuality a sin is wrong because it goes against the message of peace, love and acceptance that Jesus supposedly said.
|
Saying that you love or accept homosexual, but then saying that they're sinner because of who they love is still homophobia
I don't think it's homophobia, however,
and it is harmful, causes violence and some people even dies, sometime of suicide.
This is definitely true, and is far more relevant than my quibbling about the word "homophobia."
From my point of view, if I was catholic, I would say that calling homosexuality a sin is wrong because it goes against the message of peace, love and acceptance that Jesus supposedly said.
Agreed. In fact, many Catholic parents have gone up to bishops (at least in Canada) and said something to the effect that: "If it were my kid, and it were a choice between standing next to the magisterium and standing next to my kid, I'd pick my kid every time." The fact is that it's obviously harmful to homosexuals to preach the kinds of things that some religious people do; it'd be much better to focus on loving them first (and caring for their mental well-being) rather than focusing so much on something you happen to disagree with in their lifestyle.
|
On July 30 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 06:31 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 06:22 Klondikebar wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. Where exactly did Jesus say that homosexual sex is a sin? Jesus defines marriage as between a man and a woman, and then says that all sex outside of marriage is sinful (adultery). On July 30 2013 06:22 Shiragaku wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. But I always hated that kind of interpretation. I have talked to many Christians who say they are fine with me being queer and they will pray for me, but it is so goddamn condescending and unpleasant and passive aggressive. And they say that we are all sinners and hate is bad, but you know damn well that they mean something different when addressing homosexuality. You have injected that hate into them for your own reasons. You can say all you want that you know they mean something different, but perhaps that isn't true. I know that there are many homosexuals who are far better people than me, in the grand scheme of things, and are far more worthy in God's eyes. I cannot hate them for sinning any more than I can hate a child for lying. A child sins when he/she lies, but they are just a child. A homosexual sins when they have sex outside of marriage (marriage as defined by Christ), but so does any heterosexual who has sex outside of marriage. It is the same sin: adultery. On July 30 2013 06:29 Plansix wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. Yeah, well Protestants also interpret both Testaments and I don't agree that Jesus said homosexuality was a sin and neither does anyone in my church. I think some ass hole translated his teachings and added that line in because he was a bigot. After all, the church made a very good practice of "translating" the bible into modern text over the years and there is NO reason to believe Jesus's words came through unchanged. Also, the Catholics like to ingore the part of the old Testament that says we can't play football. And that makes slavery legal and allowable under god. Those parts they freely ignore. Or interpret as dumb. As a Catholic, I would hold that the Protestants interpret the Bible incorrectly, but that is another argument. Certainly there is no Protestant church that has the experience that the Catholic Church possesses, nor the resources. And there is no reason to believe that the Catholic Church would allow mistranslations to occur when the penalty for such an action is clearly written in Revelations. I am not familiar with any passage saying we can't play football, and no Catholics do not ignore or call dumb those passages outlining slavery. We interpret them. Leviticus 11:8, "You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their(pigs) carcasses; they are unclean to you." -ie, we can't play football, or eat natural casing pork hotdogs. And interpret is a nice word for "ignore that which is politically unpopular at the time". And as no one in the Catholic Church is blessed with longer life than anyone else, so the of experience level for them is about the same as my small town church. Now, if you want to talk about the collective experience and history of the church, you could, but I don't think we really want to dive into the amazing history the Catholic Church.
I'm not going to defend the practices of the catholic church on homosexuality, but people who like to quote random passages of Leviticus and ask why we don't follow them are somewhat misguided. Christianity takes the view (in general) that Jesus created a new covenant that somewhat replaces Leviticus. The church in general bases their objection on some passages from Paul's Letters (which I don't quite remember).
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
|
On July 30 2013 23:54 packrat386 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote:On July 30 2013 06:31 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 06:22 Klondikebar wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. Where exactly did Jesus say that homosexual sex is a sin? Jesus defines marriage as between a man and a woman, and then says that all sex outside of marriage is sinful (adultery). On July 30 2013 06:22 Shiragaku wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. But I always hated that kind of interpretation. I have talked to many Christians who say they are fine with me being queer and they will pray for me, but it is so goddamn condescending and unpleasant and passive aggressive. And they say that we are all sinners and hate is bad, but you know damn well that they mean something different when addressing homosexuality. You have injected that hate into them for your own reasons. You can say all you want that you know they mean something different, but perhaps that isn't true. I know that there are many homosexuals who are far better people than me, in the grand scheme of things, and are far more worthy in God's eyes. I cannot hate them for sinning any more than I can hate a child for lying. A child sins when he/she lies, but they are just a child. A homosexual sins when they have sex outside of marriage (marriage as defined by Christ), but so does any heterosexual who has sex outside of marriage. It is the same sin: adultery. On July 30 2013 06:29 Plansix wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. Yeah, well Protestants also interpret both Testaments and I don't agree that Jesus said homosexuality was a sin and neither does anyone in my church. I think some ass hole translated his teachings and added that line in because he was a bigot. After all, the church made a very good practice of "translating" the bible into modern text over the years and there is NO reason to believe Jesus's words came through unchanged. Also, the Catholics like to ingore the part of the old Testament that says we can't play football. And that makes slavery legal and allowable under god. Those parts they freely ignore. Or interpret as dumb. As a Catholic, I would hold that the Protestants interpret the Bible incorrectly, but that is another argument. Certainly there is no Protestant church that has the experience that the Catholic Church possesses, nor the resources. And there is no reason to believe that the Catholic Church would allow mistranslations to occur when the penalty for such an action is clearly written in Revelations. I am not familiar with any passage saying we can't play football, and no Catholics do not ignore or call dumb those passages outlining slavery. We interpret them. Leviticus 11:8, "You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their(pigs) carcasses; they are unclean to you." -ie, we can't play football, or eat natural casing pork hotdogs. And interpret is a nice word for "ignore that which is politically unpopular at the time". And as no one in the Catholic Church is blessed with longer life than anyone else, so the of experience level for them is about the same as my small town church. Now, if you want to talk about the collective experience and history of the church, you could, but I don't think we really want to dive into the amazing history the Catholic Church. I'm not going to defend the practices of the catholic church on homosexuality, but people who like to quote random passages of Leviticus and ask why we don't follow them are somewhat misguided. Christianity takes the view (in general) that Jesus created a new covenant that somewhat replaces Leviticus. The church in general bases their objection on some passages from Paul's Letters (which I don't quite remember).
Yeah Paul also wrote an entire book condoning slavery and said that heterosexual marriage was just a sinful indulgence itself. A lot of Christians ignore those passages when he clearly isn't exactly an authority on human rights or relationships.
|
I've been looking for a news stroy on TL about the issues in russia right now and couldn't find one. This is kind of big and probably should be edited into the OP:
Russia's Anti-Gay Crackdown
Basically Russia is now allowed to detain foreign visitors and their own citizens on the premise of being gay. Also a lot of their pride parades end in bloodshed. The effects go beyond Russia too, this law makes it illegal for gays or single parents in countries with gay rights to adopt childern Russian children. It is illegal in Russia now to say being gay is okay as that is considered gay propiganda and you can be jailed for that. With them hosting the upcomming winter olympics tensions could get pretty high.
On a lighter and more ironic note here are some SFW homoerotic pictures of Putin while he does his president stuff:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/copyranter/16-homoerotic-photos-of-vladimir-putin
|
On July 31 2013 00:11 red_hq wrote:I've been looking for a news stroy on TL about the issues in russia right now and couldn't find one. This is kind of big and probably should be edited into the OP: Russia's Anti-Gay CrackdownBasically Russia is now allowed to detain foreign visitors and their own citizens on the premise of being gay. Also a lot of their pride parades end in bloodshed. The effects go beyond Russia too, this law makes it illegal for gays or single parents in countries with gay rights to adopt childern Russian children. It is illegal in Russia now to say being gay is okay as that is considered gay propiganda and you can be jailed for that. With them hosting the upcomming winter olympics tensions could get pretty high. On a lighter and more ironic note here are some SFW homoerotic pictures of Putin while he does his president stuff: http://www.buzzfeed.com/copyranter/16-homoerotic-photos-of-vladimir-putin
Yea it is horrible.
Also for the Olympic. I'm pretty sure they originally said that the law would be modified or lifted during the event to prevent backlash and stuff. But seems like they retracted that comment and gay athletes and visitor can be arrested :/ . (source)
|
On July 30 2013 23:54 packrat386 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote:On July 30 2013 06:31 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 06:22 Klondikebar wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. Where exactly did Jesus say that homosexual sex is a sin? Jesus defines marriage as between a man and a woman, and then says that all sex outside of marriage is sinful (adultery). On July 30 2013 06:22 Shiragaku wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. But I always hated that kind of interpretation. I have talked to many Christians who say they are fine with me being queer and they will pray for me, but it is so goddamn condescending and unpleasant and passive aggressive. And they say that we are all sinners and hate is bad, but you know damn well that they mean something different when addressing homosexuality. You have injected that hate into them for your own reasons. You can say all you want that you know they mean something different, but perhaps that isn't true. I know that there are many homosexuals who are far better people than me, in the grand scheme of things, and are far more worthy in God's eyes. I cannot hate them for sinning any more than I can hate a child for lying. A child sins when he/she lies, but they are just a child. A homosexual sins when they have sex outside of marriage (marriage as defined by Christ), but so does any heterosexual who has sex outside of marriage. It is the same sin: adultery. On July 30 2013 06:29 Plansix wrote:On July 30 2013 06:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 30 2013 04:01 KwarK wrote:On July 30 2013 03:59 radscorpion9 wrote:I'm really curious as to whether the church will ever fully support gays in spite of what is written in the bible. Will they eventually just gloss over what was written and focus more heavily on what Jesus said in context "X"? They already seem to be ignoring the old testament, but it would be interesting to see them take it a step further. It will be funny then to inquire what their religion really is, except a string of their own personal interpretations and not the word of God . I don't want to start a religious debate, but I think the future of the church in the light of progressive secular humanist values is really fascinating. Jesus never condemned gays, he was actually pretty good about not condemning people. No further steps are needed for Catholics to stop hating gays, in fact, not hating people is pretty much the core message of Jesus. Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable. Now, believing that homosexual sex is a sin and that homosexual marriage is a sinful practice is not "hating" gays. The Catholic Church does not teach that gays should be hated. In fact, they teach the opposite. Homosexuals should be loved just like any other sinner (we are all sinners). Also, Catholics don't ignore the Old Testament. They interpret it. Yeah, well Protestants also interpret both Testaments and I don't agree that Jesus said homosexuality was a sin and neither does anyone in my church. I think some ass hole translated his teachings and added that line in because he was a bigot. After all, the church made a very good practice of "translating" the bible into modern text over the years and there is NO reason to believe Jesus's words came through unchanged. Also, the Catholics like to ingore the part of the old Testament that says we can't play football. And that makes slavery legal and allowable under god. Those parts they freely ignore. Or interpret as dumb. As a Catholic, I would hold that the Protestants interpret the Bible incorrectly, but that is another argument. Certainly there is no Protestant church that has the experience that the Catholic Church possesses, nor the resources. And there is no reason to believe that the Catholic Church would allow mistranslations to occur when the penalty for such an action is clearly written in Revelations. I am not familiar with any passage saying we can't play football, and no Catholics do not ignore or call dumb those passages outlining slavery. We interpret them. Leviticus 11:8, "You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their(pigs) carcasses; they are unclean to you." -ie, we can't play football, or eat natural casing pork hotdogs. And interpret is a nice word for "ignore that which is politically unpopular at the time". And as no one in the Catholic Church is blessed with longer life than anyone else, so the of experience level for them is about the same as my small town church. Now, if you want to talk about the collective experience and history of the church, you could, but I don't think we really want to dive into the amazing history the Catholic Church. I'm not going to defend the practices of the catholic church on homosexuality, but people who like to quote random passages of Leviticus and ask why we don't follow them are somewhat misguided. Christianity takes the view (in general) that Jesus created a new covenant that somewhat replaces Leviticus. The church in general bases their objection on some passages from Paul's Letters (which I don't quite remember).
I only break those golden passages out when I deal with people who claim the exact wording of the Bible is divine law and should be taken word for word. Its sort of like dealing with people who talk about constitutional rights, but are shocked to find out what is in the Constitution. Like when they find out that the second amendment has the word “regulated” in it and their mind is blown, right before they decide to ignore it. When I have to go down to the level of call the Bible the “magic book you picked up at B&N,” you know most rational discussion has gone out the door. Don’t let yourself be lumped in with those people, because you clearly aren’t one of them.
|
On July 31 2013 01:17 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 00:11 red_hq wrote:I've been looking for a news stroy on TL about the issues in russia right now and couldn't find one. This is kind of big and probably should be edited into the OP: Russia's Anti-Gay CrackdownBasically Russia is now allowed to detain foreign visitors and their own citizens on the premise of being gay. Also a lot of their pride parades end in bloodshed. The effects go beyond Russia too, this law makes it illegal for gays or single parents in countries with gay rights to adopt childern Russian children. It is illegal in Russia now to say being gay is okay as that is considered gay propiganda and you can be jailed for that. With them hosting the upcomming winter olympics tensions could get pretty high. On a lighter and more ironic note here are some SFW homoerotic pictures of Putin while he does his president stuff: http://www.buzzfeed.com/copyranter/16-homoerotic-photos-of-vladimir-putin Yea it is horrible. Also for the Olympic. I'm pretty sure they originally said that the law would be modified or lifted during the event to prevent backlash and stuff. But seems like they retracted that comment and gay athletes and visitor can be arrested :/ . ( source)
Everything we have right now are statements from individual politicians. For example tagesschau.de quoted Dmitri Kosak today who said the law will be lifted. It's currently the headline.
As Kosak is politically responsible for the olympics in Russia, I guess his opinion is more important though.
|
"Jesus did say that homosexual sex is a sin. This is inarguable."
That's probably true. The "God" from the Bible also said "you can beat up your slave to an extent that they can't walk for a few days as long as the slave doesn't die because SLAVE IS YOUR PROPERTY". Or, you know, that a male can take a female slave and have her as his wife against her will. Or a bunch of other completely nonsensical primitive garbage which should disgust any reasonably "moral" (if you wanna use that word) human being in 21st century. Yep, that was totally God who said that.
No.. No wait, I'm having.. I'm having a revelation... I can clearly see that it makes infinitely more sense that it was probably people who wrote all that shit, without any divine guidance, since their social norms were not quite as advanced back then. I guess it's also possible that God is a moron.
Like, seriously, to me it makes sense that even a *SINGLE* wrong thing in the Bible should automatically discredit it to any rational human being. Why? Because it's claiming to be a word of God, who is *supposed* to be infallible, perfect, all-knowing, all-understanding and benevolent. He cannot suddenly change his mind. If this God appears to be parallel in his moral stances to the human beings who lived during that period of time, what's more likely, that it was actually God or that people wrote it?
When people say "Oh, we're not picking and choosing..".. Yes. Yes, you are. If the sole source of your beliefs is messed up, you can't go around and preach some parts from it which coincide with your worldview. That's intelectually dishonest and delusional.
|
Like, seriously, to me it makes sense that even a *SINGLE* wrong thing in the Bible should automatically discredit it to any rational human being. Why? Because it's claiming to be a word of God, who is *supposed* to be infallible, perfect, all-knowing, all-understanding and benevolent. He cannot suddenly change his mind. If this God appears to be parallel in his moral stances to the human beings who lived during that period of time, what's more likely, that it was actually God or that people wrote it?
Pretty big strawman. Most mainline Christian denominations aren't literal inerrantists. They tend to believe that the message of the Bible is infallible, but that it was written by human beings who weren't infallible (I don't think anyone thinks that the Bible was literally written by God).
|
On July 31 2013 01:39 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +Like, seriously, to me it makes sense that even a *SINGLE* wrong thing in the Bible should automatically discredit it to any rational human being. Why? Because it's claiming to be a word of God, who is *supposed* to be infallible, perfect, all-knowing, all-understanding and benevolent. He cannot suddenly change his mind. If this God appears to be parallel in his moral stances to the human beings who lived during that period of time, what's more likely, that it was actually God or that people wrote it? Pretty big strawman. Most mainline Christian denominations aren't literal inerrantists. They tend to believe that the message of the Bible is infallible, but that it was written by human beings who weren't infallible (I don't think anyone thinks that the Bible was literally written by God).
Yeah they do. I know many of them. They say that the "New Covenant" makes the Old Testament obsolete and then the New Testament has a lot of metaphors so they can pick and choose what's literal and what's up for interpretation while still claiming it's all the infallible word of God. It shuts down any sort of criticism or argumentation, at least from their perspective. It can't possibly be wrong because God said it so anything you say against it is just ignored because it's obviously wrong.
|
On July 31 2013 01:45 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 01:39 Shiori wrote:Like, seriously, to me it makes sense that even a *SINGLE* wrong thing in the Bible should automatically discredit it to any rational human being. Why? Because it's claiming to be a word of God, who is *supposed* to be infallible, perfect, all-knowing, all-understanding and benevolent. He cannot suddenly change his mind. If this God appears to be parallel in his moral stances to the human beings who lived during that period of time, what's more likely, that it was actually God or that people wrote it? Pretty big strawman. Most mainline Christian denominations aren't literal inerrantists. They tend to believe that the message of the Bible is infallible, but that it was written by human beings who weren't infallible (I don't think anyone thinks that the Bible was literally written by God). Yeah they do. I know many of them. They say that the "New Covenant" makes the Old Testament obsolete and then the New Testament has a lot of metaphors so they can pick and choose what's literal and what's up for interpretation while still claiming it's all the infallible word of God. It shuts down any sort of criticism or argumentation, at least from their perspective. It can't possibly be wrong because God said it so anything you say against it is just ignored because it's obviously wrong.
Those people are idiots :p.
|
On July 31 2013 01:46 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 01:45 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 01:39 Shiori wrote:Like, seriously, to me it makes sense that even a *SINGLE* wrong thing in the Bible should automatically discredit it to any rational human being. Why? Because it's claiming to be a word of God, who is *supposed* to be infallible, perfect, all-knowing, all-understanding and benevolent. He cannot suddenly change his mind. If this God appears to be parallel in his moral stances to the human beings who lived during that period of time, what's more likely, that it was actually God or that people wrote it? Pretty big strawman. Most mainline Christian denominations aren't literal inerrantists. They tend to believe that the message of the Bible is infallible, but that it was written by human beings who weren't infallible (I don't think anyone thinks that the Bible was literally written by God). Yeah they do. I know many of them. They say that the "New Covenant" makes the Old Testament obsolete and then the New Testament has a lot of metaphors so they can pick and choose what's literal and what's up for interpretation while still claiming it's all the infallible word of God. It shuts down any sort of criticism or argumentation, at least from their perspective. It can't possibly be wrong because God said it so anything you say against it is just ignored because it's obviously wrong. Those people are idiots :p.
Yes, but these people vote. These people donate money to politicians and organizations that are incredibly bigoted. These people will beat the shit out of you in a parking lot because they are filled with the love of Christ. We call them idiots on the internet but in reality they make the deep south incredibly dangerous.
|
On July 31 2013 01:46 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 01:45 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 01:39 Shiori wrote:Like, seriously, to me it makes sense that even a *SINGLE* wrong thing in the Bible should automatically discredit it to any rational human being. Why? Because it's claiming to be a word of God, who is *supposed* to be infallible, perfect, all-knowing, all-understanding and benevolent. He cannot suddenly change his mind. If this God appears to be parallel in his moral stances to the human beings who lived during that period of time, what's more likely, that it was actually God or that people wrote it? Pretty big strawman. Most mainline Christian denominations aren't literal inerrantists. They tend to believe that the message of the Bible is infallible, but that it was written by human beings who weren't infallible (I don't think anyone thinks that the Bible was literally written by God). Yeah they do. I know many of them. They say that the "New Covenant" makes the Old Testament obsolete and then the New Testament has a lot of metaphors so they can pick and choose what's literal and what's up for interpretation while still claiming it's all the infallible word of God. It shuts down any sort of criticism or argumentation, at least from their perspective. It can't possibly be wrong because God said it so anything you say against it is just ignored because it's obviously wrong. Those people are idiots :p.
We have a whole legion of them in the US and they are a real problem. No one likes them, but they have this nasty habit of hiding behind all the rational religious folks and claiming "Look, all those people are out to get us, we are both Christian, so they are out to get us, they are out to get you too. By the way, we fund a "clinic" to "cure" gay people, hope thats not a problem. Got any gay kids you want fixed."
So yeah, those people suck, but are legion and the internet has only made them worse.
|
On July 31 2013 01:39 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +Like, seriously, to me it makes sense that even a *SINGLE* wrong thing in the Bible should automatically discredit it to any rational human being. Why? Because it's claiming to be a word of God, who is *supposed* to be infallible, perfect, all-knowing, all-understanding and benevolent. He cannot suddenly change his mind. If this God appears to be parallel in his moral stances to the human beings who lived during that period of time, what's more likely, that it was actually God or that people wrote it? Pretty big strawman. Most mainline Christian denominations aren't literal inerrantists. They tend to believe that the message of the Bible is infallible, but that it was written by human beings who weren't infallible (I don't think anyone thinks that the Bible was literally written by God).
This makes no sense at all. So the "message" is infallible but words aren't infallible. Could you translate this for me?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
