Interesting take?

Double Dittos what Brian just said!!!

I did not leave as many children did as this pompus young man spoke in his condesending way. I listened to the entire 3:21 minutes.
Here's what I got. This guy knows NOTHING about the Bible and what it says.

It's a shame that in today's world, I, as a Christian am supposed to sit quitely through and listen to something like this and not "deny themselves the opportunity to actually learn something" but when I defend my faith and my position I believe in "destructive superstition" and should "abandon religion in favor of one's intellect and conscience."

In a forum where personal attacks on one's IQ and beliefs are common I am certain I will be persectuted here. Still, I will stand for the Bible and ALL it's teachings.

I listened to the entire 3:21 minutes.
Here's what I got. This guy knows NOTHING about the Bible and what it says.

Apparently, neither do you.

boxdmc wrote:

I did not leave as many children did as this pompus young man spoke in his condesending way. I listened to the entire 3:21 minutes.
Here's what I got. This guy knows NOTHING about the Bible and what it says.

It's a shame that in today's world, I, as a Christian am supposed to sit quitely through and listen to something like this and not "deny themselves the opportunity to actually learn something" but when I defend my faith and my position I believe in "destructive superstition" and should "abandon religion in favor of one's intellect and conscience."

In a forum where personal attacks on one's IQ and beliefs are common I am certain I will be persectuted here. Still, I will stand for the Bible and ALL it's teachings.

By what standard of measure is your self-proclaimed "right" to never have to listen to a different point of view superior to Dan Savage's right to speak what he believes? IMO, walking out on the speaker is a) rude, and b)a passive-aggressive form of attack.

When the Bible gets rewritten by God himself, then I will believe what it says. Until then.... I'll believe what I want to believe. Just like every other bible-thumping, stone-throwing sinner in this world.

ha ha.

[This message has been edited by milescity (4/29/2012)]

Great video. Great comments.

How far we've come on this issue in just my lifetime (50 years) is amazing. Yet, when young people are still being bullied to the point where they feel the only solution is suicide, it's very clear that we still have a long way to go.

Boxdmc - Do you believe that Mr. Savage made up the passages in the bible to which he was referring? If so, my poor, persecuted Christian friend, please feel free to tell all of us exactly where he was in error.

Go grab your bible if you have to. I've got mine right here, and I can practically guarantee that I know what the "good book" actually says better than you do. Prove me wrong and I will gladly apologize for stepping on your feelings.

In a forum where personal attacks on one's IQ and beliefs are common I am certain I will be persectuted here. Still, I will stand for the Bible and ALL it's teachings.

ALL it's teachings? Do you hate figs? Have you ever eaten bacon or shrimp? Are you wearing a cotton blend shirt? Yep, I guess you're hell-fodder like the rest of us. Monster.

Boxdmc has obviously never read A Year of Living Biblically. If he had, he would realize that it is impossible to live by ALL the Bible's teachings. For one thing, there are so many of them. Second, many of the things the Bible prescribes are completely illegal (Thank God!). And third, the Bible contradicts itself in numerous places.

So good luck, Boxdmc. I predict you're going to be so busy trying to figure out which end is up for the next decade or so that we will no longer be bothered by your hypocritical and nonsensical claims.

(By the way, I'm not persecuting you... I'm simply pointing out the obvious ... but something tells me you can't handle simple criticism).

As I understand it, when Jesus came along, his followers got to skip all the old testament rules and only had to follow the ten commandments and Jesus' statements. Like remarriage after divorce if the spouse is still living is right out.

As for homosexuality, JC was silent on the subject. Said nada on contraception and abortion as well.

I think there are 2 kinds of people. For brevity I will call them Bible thumpers and Christians.

Bible thumpers grab every word and phrase of the Bible and use them where they need them in an effort to support THEIR personal beliefs.

Christians are those who follow the teachings of Christ. Those are NEW Testament books.

Most Bible thumpers live by the Old Testament.

Some of the best Christians I know are homosexuals. They attend church. Some are even ministers.

hey ya'll--i loved giggling to this--as for homosexuals and the bible--i believe we are all loved by Jesus and his father who created us all--i have found a very loving and accepting church who teach the bible to ALL PEOPLE who want to learn and be loved and cared for by our creator and his son--this church is on the corner of Tompy and Strevell and we just recently voted in a great preacher from Missoula--come meet her and all of us--by the way Bob Thaden did a marvelous job on my wife's and my committment ceremony--ttfn--dawn

"I've done everything the Bible says - even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff!"

- Ned Flanders

Nic, would this be the loving Creator who told Abraham to murder his son or the loving Creator who doomed everyone to Hell or the loving Creator who flooded the world, killing 99.9% of the world's population or the loving Creator who ... wait, it really doesn't matter.

Nic are you saying your "wife" and you are a gay couple that had a marriage ceremony in that church...are you a female as well?? Couldn't tell from your post...but if so, good for you and hooray for your church...

Kacey wrote:

I think there are 2 kinds of people. For brevity I will call them Bible thumpers and Christians.

Bible thumpers grab every word and phrase of the Bible and use them where they need them in an effort to support THEIR personal beliefs.

Christians are those who follow the teachings of Christ. Those are NEW Testament books.

Most Bible thumpers live by the Old Testament.

Some of the best Christians I know are homosexuals. They attend church. Some are even ministers.

Exactly which teachings of the New Testament? Jesus was a jew that kept the law. By your definition, Jesus was a "Bible Thumper". Ignoring several problems here with your statement that are part of the origin and reliability issues, what teachings? Consider the following concerning salvation:

Paul taught the following:

Ephesians 2: 8 - 9
"for by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God - not the result of works, so that no one may boast."

While Jesus said this:

"Thus you will know them by their fruits. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?' Then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; go away from me, you evildoers.' "?

Paul says:

". . . a person is justified not by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by doing the works of the law, because no one will be justified by the works of the law" ? Gal 2:16

"For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law." Rom 3:28]

Jesus is reported as saying:

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
"You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, 'You shall not murder'; and 'whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.' But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment; and if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council; and if you say, 'You fool,' you will be liable to the hell of fire. " Matt 5:17-22

" The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of Yahweh is preached, and every man presseth (forces his way) into it. And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail." Luke 16:16-17

"One day an expert on Moses' laws came to test Jesus' orthodoxy by asking him this question: "Teacher, what does a man need to do to live forever in heaven?" Jesus replied, "What does Moses' law say about it?" "It says," he replied, " that you must love the lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind. And you must love your neighbor just as much as you love yourself. " "Right!", Jesus told him. "Do this and you shall live!"" Luke 10:25-37

While Paul clearly taught that we are saved by being passive beneficiaries of what Christ did, JESUS clearly taught that our salvation hinges on what we do (our "works"), along with what God does ( God's "grace")


"You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, how can its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything, but is thrown out and trampled under foot. "You are the light of the world. A city built on a hill cannot be hid. No one after lighting a lamp puts it under the bushel basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father in heaven. Matt 4:17-19

" "Everyone therefore who acknowledges me before others, I also will acknowledge before my Father in heaven; but whoever denies me before others, I also will deny before my Father in heaven. Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one's foes will be members of one's own household. Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever does not take up the cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Those who find their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it. Matt 10:32-36

Again, which should we obey and which should me ignore? I could go on with numerous other passages.

If the New Testament does not present a unified message in how one is saved, which is the whole point of being a christian, why should we believe anything it says?

Consider the internal discrepancy concerning the resurrection:

What time did the women visit the tomb?

 Matthew: "as it began to dawn" (28:1)
 Mark: "very early in the morning . . . at the rising of the sun" (16:2, KJV); "when the sun had risen" (NRSV); "just after sunrise" (NIV)
 Luke: "very early in the morning" (24:1, KJV) "at early dawn" (NRSV)

Who were the women?

 Matthew: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (28:1)
 Mark: Mary Magdalene, the mother of James, and Salome (16:1)
 Luke: Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James and other women (24:10)
 John: Mary Magdalene (20:1)

Was the tomb open when they arrived?

 Matthew: No (28:2)
 Mark: Yes (16:4)
 Luke: Yes (24:2)
 John: Yes (20:1)

Where were these messengers situated?

 Matthew: Angel sitting on the stone (28:2)
 Mark: Young man sitting inside, on the right (16:5)
 Luke: Two men standing inside (24:4)
 John: Two angels sitting on each end of the bed (20:12)

What did the messenger(s) say?

 Matthew: "Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead: and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you." (28:5-7)

 Mark: "Be not afrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him. But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you." (16:6-7)

 Luke: "Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen:
remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again." (24:5-7)

 John: "Woman, why weepest thou?" (20:13)

Where did the ascension take place?

 Matthew: No ascension. Book ends on mountain in Galilee

 Mark: In or near Jerusalem, after supper (16:1912)

 Luke: In Bethany, very close to Jerusalem, after supper (24:50-51)

 John: No ascension

 Paul: No ascension

 Acts: Ascended from Mount of Olives (1:9-12)


These are just two small examples of key doctrines that christianity teaches from the NEW TESTAMENT. There are hundreds of additional examples of such discrepancy. If the bible is the inerrant "word" why didn't God take more care to make sure and present a consistent message?

In the final analysis, the best thing we can do is set all of this aside and trust our own abilities to reason.

There are hundreds of additional examples of such discrepancy. If the bible is the inerrant "word" why didn't God take more care to make sure and present a consistent message?

In the final analysis, the best thing we can do is set all of this aside and trust our own abilities to reason.

Everyone can check out more at The Reason Project.

http://www.project-reason...e_project/

Just click on the Bible link in the upper right-hand corner. It also has information from Qur'an and Book of Mormon. When you click on a topic, it will give the verses dealing with the topic. If you click on the tiny red link at the end of each verse, it will give the "rebuttal."

Richard,
Your post was a VERY good read.

[This message has been edited by Kelly (4/29/2012)]

That may have been the best bitchslap I have ever read on MC.com, Richard. Kudos, my friend. Damn.

Richard- Beer or Coffee I am buying.

hey brian--we r a same sex couple--i do not consider myself to be a lesbian--but i am very fortunate to be a woman in love with woman--i wish we were married but it is illegal in montana--so we had a committment ceremony and we know we r married--it is too bad that there r people that feel that people cannot love who they want and need to love--we r very open with our love and people that dont like it can turn their heads--ttfn--dawn

yes my God is the same God who gave this world those challenges but it is Satan who makes the challenges harder than they need to be

yes my God is the same God who gave this world those challenges but it is Satan who makes the challenges harder than they need to be

In your estimation, is Satan as powerful as your God? I am curious.

Satan is Barack Obama!

Proof- the name. S.A.T.A.N. Has TWO A's, just like bArAck!! Coincidence??? I think not!!

Take out both "A"s and that leaves S. T. N. which is clearly a reverse acronym for "aN-T-chriSt!" You see? All is revealed simply be reading the obvious symbols in his name.

Now, let's look at OBAMA. Obviously the letters AMA refer to the American Medical Association, which is the main opposition to the Obamacare policies, specifically those which will order that all medical practitioners who refuse to treat homeless Hawaiians for free and let them live in their spare rooms be sacrificed. The OB could either be a reverse description for BO, also the initials of Barack Obama or Body Odor, meaning that either one is a sticky stack of smelly sweat. It could also stand for Off Base, which implies that Obama is anti military, unless he is using them to personally enhance his electability by assassinating his namesake and Islamic ally Osama Obama Bin Lada.

You can see that if you just open your eyes and read the obvious you can see the simple solutions. It's as easy as looking in the mirror.


FH

PS- I know, I know. It was either post this or a graphic of "That's Hot" after the lesbian couple posting. I get bored on Sunday nights after church.

Does it hurt much, Frank?

Does it hurt much, Frank?

Only to the likes of you and me Brian.

hey brian--satan is not as powerful--but God is letting him do his thing and testing us--then when HE is ready Satan will be put in his place--ttfn--dawn

[This message has been edited by Nic (4/29/2012)]

So ... your god could stop Satan (and prevent the suffering caused by him) if he wanted to, but chooses not to?

Nic wrote:

hey brian--satan is not as powerful--but God is letting him do his thing and testing us--then when HE is ready Satan will be put in his place--ttfn--dawn

[This message has been edited by Nic (4/29/2012)]

-So satan isn't as powerful... like God is a AA battery and satan is a AAA battery, same voltage, but less capacity?

-doesn't it seem odd to you that God is using satan to work out your sanctification?

-How do you know when it is God testing you and when it is satan testing you?

-If satan is a moral free-agent that could rebel against God, how does God now have control over satan to use him to test you? Why would God, being good allow himself the presence of evil?

Child: "Dad, there's a bully that's beating me up everyday to and from my way to school. I've tried to do everything you've told me to do, but he keeps beating me up. It hurts and I'm scared."

Father: "That's nice. I love you."

Child: "But Dad, isn't there anything you can do? Can't you help me?"

Father: "Of course I could. I love you. Don't back-sass."

Child: "But why won't you help me?"

Father: "Because you deserve to be beaten up, you ungrateful bastard! *SMACK!* Why can't you be more like your little brother?"

...

Replace "Child," "Father," and "little brother" with "Humanity," "God," and "Jesus," and you might see how the concept of a loving God refusing to help his children might be a little confusing to some.

Analytical Thinking Promotes Religious Disbelief...

http://www.sciencemag.org...6/6080/493

An excellent read: "The Power of Myth", Joseph Campbell's conversation with Bill Moyers.

Do you pagans really need a debate on whether or not it should be adam and eve rather than adam and steve. I wonder just how many of you have a secret fag session or some hippy swingers bash every now and again. I am not sure of Gods words, but mine are:

Bisexual relations--Bad!
Biracial relations--Bad!
Multiculturalism and the New world order--Bad!
Muslim--encroachment--Bad
Those who do not support the troops as they battle the Muslims-Bad

May America survive this paganism with it's sovreignty in tack, I ask this of you God almighty?

The end!

That ought to liven it up a little.

Milescity: You're not very bright, are you?

One of the dumbest posts in a long while, Milescity...Go crawl back under your rock...

doesn't even know the difference between non-theists and pagans.

I'm just trying to figure out why america's sovereignty wears a saddle.

Bridgier. That.is.really.funny.

F.H.

milescity, how I wish you had chosen another name! You are an embarrassment to sentient creatures.

milescity, your ego must be humongous. Do you think by signing on with this nom de plume people will think you are speaking for the whole community?
I enjoy the diversity on this site. Everyone has the right to their own opinions. What I don't like is extremists, right or left, who
don't have the guts to use their real names. Really, really
chickens---.

I believe there is a new troll under the bridge. Ugly bugger, too.

Where are all the troll hunters when we need one?

C'mon, show the self-loathing, closet homosexuals a little compassion.

Kind of seemed a little over the top for a high school convention.

All this shows is everyone has a right to there own opinion, if I was there and felt uncomfortable I would have left, and if I was those students teacher, I would have removed them from the room as well. The man has a good point, but for the setting he needed to handle himself more professionally.

If this had been a general assembly of all 9th thru 12th graders, I'd agree with TMF. But this was a convention of journalism students - and from the looks of most of the students in the video, they appeared to be mostly seniors and juniors. If so, it would be appropriate for them deal with controversial topics.

As for the speaker's use of profanity, I agree that was unfortunate and inappropriate. It's shocking how quickly decorum, etiquette, propriety and simple politeness have dropped out of favor in our society. If this keeps up, we'll simply be an "ization" because there will be nothing "civil" left in the way we treat each other. And that is cause for real concern.

Finally, a post in this thread I agree 100% with.

You didn't REALLY think you could post the video above and not have it challenged, did you? Because it is balderdash.

What the speaker in the video, and apparently by extension gunsandgold, seem not to understand is you can't interpret or understand anything in the bible apart from the historical and cultural context in which it was written. The meaning of words changes through out time. Allow me to demonstrate.

Let's take the words to a song with which we are all familiar, the theme song for the Flintstones TV show. Those words are:

Yubba dubba doo

Flintstones, meet the Flintstones
There the modern stone age family
From the town of Bedrock
There a page right out of history

Let's ride with the family down the street
By the courtesy of Fred's two feet
When you're with the Flintstones
Have a yabba dabba doo time
A dabba doo time
We'll have a gay old time

Flintstones, meet the Flintstones
There the modern stone age family
From the town of Bedrock
There a page right out of history

Someday, maybe Fred will win the fight
Then the cat will stay out for the night
When you're with the Flintstones
Have a yabba dabba doo time
A dabba doo time
We'll have a gay old time
We'll have a gay old time

I have emboldened the phrase "we'll have a gay old time" for special emphasis.

Does anybody believe that the word "gay" in this context mean "we'll have a homosexual" time? NO! No reasonable person would view it as a homosexual time because we all know the word gay had a different context, meaning fun, happy, joyful, etc.

And yet, the using the exegetical method of the presenter in this video, and perhaps gunsandgold, we would ignore the meaning of the words in its original setting and interpret it to mean "homosexual". And that is a problem because we are reading the current meaning of the word into a historical context, when that isn't what the word actual meant when it was originally used.

I am not going to go through all five scriptures used in the video. I do, however, want to debunk a couple of myths.

One of the passages used in the video was 1Tim 1:8-10, which states:

But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers 10 and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.

The homosexuality and kidnapping here is pederasty or sexual intercourse between and older man and a young boy. At the time this passage was written pederasty was common. Young boys were kidnapped and sold into this lifestyle.

The writer of this passage was NOT talking about relationships between two people of the same sex where both parties love each other and there is mutual consent for sexual relations. The writer was condemning the practice of misusing and abuse of children. He was condemning the practice of kidnapping children and selling them into an abhorrent lifestyle. The word "homosexuals" in the historical and cultural setting in which this passage is written has a totally different meaning than what the word means today. To not understand historical context in which this passage was written and then use it to manipulate people today to certain actions and beliefs is misguided and disingenuous.

And then there are the multiple references in the video to Sodom and Gomorrah. This passage is found in Genesis Chapter 19. Long story short: Two angels go to S&G to rescue a guy named Lot. Lot takes the guys into his home and the people in the town come banging on Lot's door and tell him to bring the two "angels" out so they can have "relations" with them. Lot refuses, the angels rescue Lot and his daughters, and S&G is destroyed.

A common misconception is S&G was destroyed because the residents were homosexual. Nowhere does the text ever say the sin of S&G was homosexuality. This passage in Genesis 19 really doesn't state why they were destroyed. There are, however, numerous other passages in both the old and new testaments that do state S&G's sin and why they were destroyed. S&G was destroyed because they were a haughty, unjust, cruel people, who plundered the poor. Again, homosexuality is never given as a reason for them being destroyed.

This leads us to one of the passages used in the video Jude 1:6-7: which states:

6 And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day, 7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire.

The word "strange flesh" here in greek, which is the original language, is "Heterus" meaning different. In order for the sin of S&G to be homosexuality the greek word would have to be "homo" for "same". It was common in the culture of S&G to humiliate perceived enemies through violent sexual humiliation. So when the people in S&G came to Lot's house and said bring out your guests so we can have relations with them, it was so they could be sexually humiliated. The sexual relations the men of S&G were seeking was with a DIFFERENT kind of being, not same-sex relations. It was for the purpose of humiliation and subjugation. Again, the cultural context is key to understanding the passage.

So the video posted is nothing more than a steaming pile of lies. It is an attempt to shame people, homosexuals in particular, into behaving in a manner where they can be manipulated though guilt and be made to feel sub-human. The truth is a certain percentage of the population is gay and has every right to express their sexuality. They didn't choose their orientation any more than gunsandgold chose his orientation. To use religion to shame people into controlling behaviors is an unforgivable violence against humanity. It must be stopped. Even Fred Flintstone knows better.