Dan Savage discusses bible at High School Journalism convention - General

[QUOTE=Governor Goblin;35776178]You keep ignoring my list of quotes bigfatworm[/QUOTE] He will continue to repeat himself and will continue to ignore what you say like a broken record, it's very infuriating but really what did you expect it's what happens when you get to such a high level of belief in something on completely irrational and contradictory grounds. BigFatWorm saying something is out of context when it is pretty darn straightforward in they way the verse is stated is nothing more then a frivilous cop out. It's funny I came from an Islamic upbringing and literally that's all everyone from that faith did aswell, you give them a contradictory or irrational quote and they say it's out of context, they never explain how even when the verse is as straightforward and blatant as a verse could possibly be, leaving almost no room for misintepretation, but still some how it's out of context when it reveals something they'd rather choose not listen too. Funny that, funny how it also seems to apply to every quote in every religious textbook ever.

[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;35776220]He will continue to repeat himself and will continue to ignore what you say like a broken record, it's very infuriating but really what did you expect it's what happens when you get to such a high level of belief in something on completely irrational and contradictory grounds.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the ad hominem there.... [QUOTE=Drax-Quin;35776220]BigFatWorm saying something is out of context when it is pretty darn straightforward in they way the verse is stated is nothing more then a frivilous cop out. It's funny I came from an Islamic upbringing and literally that's all everyone from that faith did aswell, you give them a contradictory or irrational quote and they say it's out of context, they never explain how even when the verse is as straightforward and blatant as a verse could possibly be, leaving almost no room for misintepretation, but still some how it's out of context when it reveals something they'd rather choose not listen too. Funny that, funny how it also seems to apply to every quote in every religious textbook ever.[/QUOTE] The issue is that you're taking one verse out of a whole statement made out of several, the verses you've chosen are completely different in the context of the verses surrounding them. It's like taking the statement, "People who say genocide is ok are horribly wrong" and claiming that I stated "genocide is ok". I did say those exact words, but in the context of my other words the meaning changes compeltely.

No those verses are nothing like that at all. They're literally straightforward I could paste you the whole bloody passage if you like. Also It was hardly an ad hominid I addressed your point, an ad hominid statement naturally implies that I tried to avoid discussion by insulting you which would be a fallacy. I did no such thing. Rather all I did was straight up insult you. This is an ad hominid: "Wow BigfatWorm your stupid why would anything you say be any better" -> Didn't address any points simply stated because you were stupid the points must implicitly be dumb aswell, therefore I by definition commited a fallacy as it doesn't matter if you're or are not stupid this doesn't mean your points can't be completely valid. This isn't an ad hominid: "Your an idiot because this verse clearly shows blah blah blah not blah blah" -> Started with an insult but addressed your point.

[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;35776345]No those verses are nothing like that at all. They're literally straightforward I could paste you the whole bloody passage if you like. Also It was hardly an ad hominid I addressed your point, an ad hominid statement naturally implies that I tried to avoid discussion by insulting you, which would be a fallacy I did no such thing.[/QUOTE] Saying that I'm ignoring you and repeating what I say is simply incorrect, I'm trying to answer questions that are coming to the same issue, granted you didn't try to avoid the issue so consider my statement incorrect. I'd also like you to quote this passage you're talking about, I'd very much like to read it, or just tell the verses and I'll read 'em myself.

[QUOTE=Skelmech;35770894]Dan Savage is an asshole 3/4 of the time though. He's got a "LGBT Advice column" in some newspaper and p.much enforces all the stupid gay stereotypes, oh and bi people aren't real to him. I've seen kids base their ideas of gay people around what he says and they're usually worse than straight homophobes.[/QUOTE] oh don't be silly [url]http://www.thestranger.com/SavageLovePodcast/archives/2012/04/24/savage-love-episode-288[/url]

To be honest I can't be fucked to paste out huge verses on here, go read it yourself I have and there's is nothing out of context about it, and nothing to the level you demonstrated in you above post with the genocide analogy, these are full-fledged sentences taken from within a similar framework set within the paragraph, not little snippets of text to misintepret what is being said. [URL="http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1180757?p=35775362&viewfull=1#post35775362"]THE VERSES ARE UP THERE ^^^[/URL] Hopefully someone else will paste the full paragraphs here, but I'm not your errand boy others and myself present you completely valid statement and you merely claimed they were out of context, the BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU to show they're out of context, show the passages to me and show how we misinterpreted them, should be easy it is not for me to go through countless more infuriating and mind-numbing posts with you. Good day sir. I can't stand this for much longer.

[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;35776504] BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU [/QUOTE] What? No, it's on you to show how the verses are [I]in[/I] context. You are making the claim, you have to back it up with proof.

No it is not, we showed the verses which clearly go against what he said, he then said they were out of context but didn't demonstrate how they were. Please explain how that put's the burden on me, when my initial statement was to only present the verses that went against what he stated, he was the one claiming I and others misinterpreted them. that.

[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;35776687]No it is not, we showed the verses which clearly go against what he said, he then said they were out of context but didn't demonstrate how they were. Please explain how that put's the burden on me, when my initial statement was to only present the verses that went against what he stated, he was the one claiming I and others misinterpreted them.[/QUOTE] Him denying your proof because he says it isn't in context shifts burden back to you. He isn't making a claim, he is dismissing your claim.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35776721]Him denying your proof because he says it isn't in context shifts burden back to you. He isn't making a claim, he is dismissing your claim.[/QUOTE] 1) Makes claim that old testament law is no longer relevant -> [U][Provides proof in terms of Matthews verse][/U] 2) Others claim law is still relevant -> [U][10 Commandments are part of Old Testament][Verses show Old Testmanet law is explicitly to remain in effect ][/U] 3) Claims the verses were out-of-context and misinterpreted ->[U] [Provides fuck all in terms of evidence][/U] 4) Wants me to prove verses weren't out-of-context and misinterpreted -> [Ergo I have nothing to work from] Let me provide an analogy if you still aren't on board, imagine a hypothetical situation where a person claims he saw his curtains rustling and assumed there was a ghost in the room, if I make the claim that a nearby fan likely caused this ghostly visitation that is my claim I could prove how that fan caused what looked like a ghostly apparition was moving the curtain. He can't just then turn around and say for instance "fans don't work like that, fans work like XY and Z, therefore you're wrong" that isn't dismissing my claim he hasn't yet provided any substantial proof as to how fans work like XY and Z, I meanwhile would have to continue receding my point and providing all the evidence, this could go on for entirety because ergo he can keep making shit up. Both sides have to provide evidence, they don't just make a claim and expect the other-side to provide counter-evidence which like with the misinterpretation point is impossible to even bolster my claim against, as the term of misinterpretation is far to abstract and undefined, what is misinterpreted about the verses, I need HIM TO DEFINE THAT to even have anything to work on.... Anyway my earlier post was an attempt to get ouf of this head-ache inducing thread, I hope not to make the mistake of not leaving again. Farewell.

[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;35776504]To be honest I can't be fucked to paste out huge verses on here, go read it yourself I have and there's is nothing out of context about it, and nothing to the level you demonstrated in you above post with the genocide analogy, these are full-fledged sentences taken from within a similar framework set within the paragraph, not little snippets of text to minsintepret what is being said. Hopefully someone else will paste them here, but I'm not your errand boy I present the statements you merely claimed they were out of context, the BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU to show they're out of context, show the passages to me and show how we misinterpreted them, should be easy it is not for me to go through countless more infuriating and mind-numbing posts with you. Good day sir. I can't stand this for much longer.[/QUOTE] Well, if you're not going to specify which verse you feel I didn't respond to properly I'll choose the one that seems to show up time and time again. Mat5:17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill." Yes he states that he did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill, I implore that you read on though... Mat:18 "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." The ten commandments are equal in their punishment and none should be treated the lesser Mat5:19 "Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Note how Christ refers to the commandments and not the laws here, the commandments being impossible to follow and meant to show the different ways we are flawed. Mat5:22 "But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause[b] shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire." This is yet again addressing the ten commandments, showing that you can't just follow physical laws and expect to get into heaven. Mat5:28 "But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Yet again reinforcing how the commandments can not be followed like a code of law. mat5:44 "But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you," Hmm, that seems to go against old testament law in Exodus, kind of like the laws are changing or something. All the verses after his claim about fulfilling the law either state changes to show how impossible it is to follow the commandments or completely change the law to work under the new covenant. As you can see it takes more than just reading one verse to understand its meaning, I'm not trying to shift the burden of truth on anybody but myself, you are asking the questions and I am answering. It's just a little hard to offer more in depth answers to all your questions and when I ask which answers didn't satisfy you won't tell me. If I gave answers such as the above to all for your questions I'd be here all night, speaking of which I better get some sleep.

Yes I will leave now, other people can deal with this it's boring and painstaking for me and I would like to play TF2 instead. I only glanced at what you wrote but I noticed that you have already stood on your own toes: You claimed the 10 commandments aren't law: [quote]Also the ten commandments are in no way meant to be laws that you have to follow as they are impossible to follow, they are meant to be examples of what can condemn you to hell[/quote] [quote]Note how Christ refers to the commandments and not the laws here, the commandments being impossible to follow [/quote] Yet here: [quote]This is yet again addressing the ten commandments, showing that you can't just follow physical laws[/quote] So the ten commandments are the non-physical laws?

[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;35777056]Yes I will leave now, other people can deal with this it's boring and painstaking for me and I would like to play TF2 instead. I only glanced at what you wrote but I noticed that you have already stood on your own toes: You claimed the 10 commandments aren't law: Yet here: So the ten commandments are the non-physical laws?[/QUOTE] What I meant to say is it's not as easy as not doing what the commandment states is wrong, one can simply break a commandment by thinking about breaking it.

[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;35776132]Also believing God exists doesn't save you form hell, Christianity is about far more than just that.[/QUOTE] Oh, I'm SURE of that, make no mistake. You can't have an incentive for people to follow your rules if there's only one way to be tortured forever. But is it ALSO not true, that disbelief = damnation? [quote]It's about whether you love him and whether you believe Christ died to bring grace. The choice is not God's over whether we go to heaven or hell it's ours, he wants our love for him to be genuine rather than forced.[/quote] Wow, did you hear that at ALL as you typed it? Do you not FEEL the cognitive dissonance as it leaps from your fingers to the keyboard and onto the screen? So god wants people to love him GENUINELY... And if they DON'T love him, HE WILL LIGHT YOU ON FIRE AND WATCH YOU BURN [B]FOREVER[/B]! Yeah, that's genuine alright. How could I EVER have been confused. It's not like he's trying to SCARE people into loving him or something. Unconditional love, my pucker. And even if he's only taking the people that actually love him because they WANT to and NOT because they're scared shitless of his torture-chamber, what kind of insane, broken mind sees a being that creates THESE conditions, and then legitimately says they LOVE it? God and Jesus are not [I]worthy [/I]of being loved. Love is not something you can demand. I know love in essence is just chemical reactions, like everything else we do, but [I]we [/I]give it meaning damnit, and [I]we [/I]say love is more than the hollow farce christianity and religions in general make of it. Jesus says we're supposed to love him more than our own family, and god once told a man to sacrifice his own son to him to repay a debt. In what SENSE should they deserve any such thing? In my mind, [B]nobody [/B]is worthy of those demands, especially not 'Yahweh: God of War' and his hippie son.

[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;35776204]I edited my reply a few posts up, here it is.[/QUOTE] Out of context? Okay, CLEARLY you haven't fucking read Matthew. First quote is about the law of Moses, which is from the old testament. You do not get any more contextual than that. May I suggest you actually read the bible, clearly you haven't done so.

[QUOTE=Governor Goblin;35777191]Out of context? Okay, CLEARLY you haven't fucking read Matthew. First quote is about the law of Moses, which is from the old testament. You do not get any more contextual than that. May I suggest you actually read the bible, clearly you haven't done so.[/QUOTE] Hold on. Why is Christianity even a religion, then? Why isn't it just Judaism? Why is Jesus important at all if he didn't extend or change the rules of the religion? The whole point is that those sins you committed back in the old days are going to be forgiven. The point of the New Testament was that even if you fucked up, Jesus still loved you and would welcome you into heaven with open arms. By the way, this is in total agreement with what Dan Savage was saying. The Old Testament shouldn't be listened to. The rules still apply, but on a personal level rather than a societal level as a whole. Anything you find that says otherwise in the New Testament is just another example of the gross contradictions that are common in the bible. And by the way, I would much rather be in company of the christians who say "Jesus is lord and savior he will forgive you blah blah blah" versus the christian who says "You will burn in hell! God hates fags/atheists/aldulterers/witches!"

[QUOTE=Governor Goblin;35777191]Out of context? Okay, CLEARLY you haven't fucking read Matthew. First quote is about the law of Moses, which is from the old testament. You do not get any more contextual than that. May I suggest you actually read the bible, clearly you haven't done so.[/QUOTE] I have read it and provided an explanation in my post at the top of the page, but if you're referring to your quote from John 1:17 [QUOTE=Governor Goblin;35777191]“Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law" “For the law was given by Moses" John 1:17[/QUOTE] I can offer some insight: John1:17 "For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ." It's pretty clear what's being stated here, instead of impossible rules that must be followed, Christ offers instead grace which frees us from needing to follow any laws to go to heaven. Where did you get the quote before that though? [editline]1st May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=J-Dude;35777181]Oh, I'm SURE of that, make no mistake. You can't have an incentive for people to follow your rules if there's only one way to be tortured forever. But is it ALSO not true, that disbelief = damnation? Wow, did you hear that at ALL as you typed it? Do you not FEEL the cognitive dissonance as it leaps from your fingers to the keyboard and onto the screen? So god wants people to love him GENUINELY... And if they DON'T love him, HE WILL LIGHT YOU ON FIRE AND WATCH YOU BURN [B]FOREVER[/B]! Yeah, that's genuine alright. How could I EVER have been confused. It's not like he's trying to SCARE people into loving him or something. Unconditional love, my pucker. And even if he's only taking the people that actually love him because they WANT to and NOT because they're scared shitless of his torture-chamber, what kind of insane, broken mind sees a being that creates THESE conditions, and then legitimately says they LOVE it? God and Jesus are not [I]worthy [/I]of being loved. Love is not something you can demand. I know love in essence is just chemical reactions, like everything else we do, but [I]we [/I]give it meaning damnit, and [I]we [/I]say love is more than the hollow farce christianity and religions in general make of it. Jesus says we're supposed to love him more than our own family, and god once told a man to sacrifice his own son to him to repay a debt. In what SENSE should they deserve any such thing? In my mind, [B]nobody [/B]is worthy of those demands, especially not 'Yahweh: God of War' and his hippie son.[/QUOTE] I think giving us existence, free will and possible passage into an eternal paradise is enough to love him, but I can't speak for everybody. I would like to note that before Abraham did not end up sacrificing Jacob as God in fact made sure he did not. It's all supposed to reinforce the fact that we are meant to love him above all others. That doesn't mean murder someone in the name of God, it means put him above all other worldly things as he was the only one who created you. I realize you don't agree with my statements, but I am simply trying to explain what I believe. [QUOTE=yawmwen;35777315]The whole point is that those sins you committed back in the old days are going to be forgiven. The point of the New Testament was that even if you fucked up, Jesus still loved you and would welcome you into heaven with open arms.[/QUOTE] Well, that's not quite the idea behind Christianity, we don't believe your sins are forgiven without any actions on your part, you're still required to accept Christ's sacrifice and follow what he said. The idea is that we don't live under any of the laws that were stated in the old testament that had to be followed to the letter or else you'd be sure to die.

Because of Jesus. To be as blunt as humanly possible. It's the same thing with Islam. It all comes down to the messiah. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are pretty much the exact same thing. [editline]30th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;35777412] It's pretty clear what's being stated here, instead of impossible rules that must be followed, Christ offers instead grace which frees us from needing to follow any laws to go to heaven. Where did you get the quote before that though?[/QUOTE] That doesn't prove or disprove what I said. He's putting more empasis on him, but not taking from Moses.

[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;35771264]As was expected he just brings up a whole bunch of old testemant law that isn't even supposed to be relevant to the religion anymore. Anybody who knows a little bit about christianity can see the flaws in his arguments.[/QUOTE] who decides what's relevant and what isn't? Nobody. You can just pick up the bible, pick a few sentences that you like and say they are meaningful and important, without saying if they are actually relevant. Same thing for somebody that despises the Bible.

[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;35777412] Well, that's not quite the idea behind Christianity, we don't believe your sins are forgiven without any actions on your part, you're still required to accept Christ's sacrifice and follow what he said. The idea is that we don't live under any of the laws that were stated in the old testament that had to be followed to the letter or else you'd be sure to die.[/QUOTE] It says in the bible that if you repent your sins and forgive others of their sins then you are forgiven.

[QUOTE=Governor Goblin;35777554]Because of Jesus. To be as blunt as humanly possible. It's the same thing with Islam. It all comes down to the messiah. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are pretty much the exact same thing. [editline]30th April 2012[/editline] That doesn't prove or disprove what I said. He's putting more empasis on him, but not taking from Moses.[/QUOTE] Yes, but we are under the covenant of grace instead of the first covenant, as is stated in various places in the bible(such as Rom6:14 and Heb9:15) this specific quote from John also states that not only grace but truth also came through Christ, both of which are greater than any other law. Also when you mention the parallels of Christianity to Islam I'm afraid I know way to little about the former to make any comments, perhaps on a very basic level the religions are similar though. [QUOTE=yawmwen;35777697]It says in the bible that if you repent your sins and forgive others of their sins then you are forgiven.[/QUOTE] Yes, but it is also required that you accept Christ as your savior in order to even have a chance to go to heaven, although repentance is also very important once one is a christian.

[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;35777734] Yes, but it is also required that you accept Christ as your savior in order to even have a chance to go to heaven, although repentance is also very important once one is a christian.[/QUOTE] Well, logically you wouldn't be able to repent sins you didn't know you committed. The only way someone could properly repent their sins would be through knowing the rules of the bible. My point is that according to the bible, following the rules is less important than knowing that you are imperfect being that needs forgiveness.

[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;35777734]Yes, but we are under the covenant of grace instead of the first covenant, as is stated in various places in the bible(such as Rom6:14 and Heb9:15) this specific quote from John also states that not only grace but truth also came through Christ, both of which are greater than any other law. Also when you mention the parallels of Christianity to Islam I'm afraid I know way to little about the former to make any comments, perhaps on a very basic level the religions are similar though. Yes, but it is also required that you accept Christ as your savior in order to even have a chance to go to heaven, although repentance is also very important once one is a christian.[/QUOTE] It's not fucking nullifying the law of Moses though. No, they're pretty much the same religion.

[QUOTE=KlaseR;35777656]who decides what's relevant and what isn't? Nobody. You can just pick up the bible, pick a few sentences that you like and say they are meaningful and important, without saying if they are actually relevant. Same thing for somebody that despises the Bible.[/QUOTE] Well I'd say it's all relevant in some context, I'm just saying the laws have changed and that people(christian and atheist) need to stop pretending that we are either under the old testament law still or saying that Christians believe parts of the old testament law and not others as that is simply not what the religion is supposed to be about. [QUOTE=Governor Goblin;35777847]It's not fucking nullifying the law of Moses though. No, they're pretty much the same religion.[/QUOTE] Ok, then I'll take the verses from Romans and Hebrews: Rom6:14 "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace." Pretty clear in its statement there Heb9:15 "And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance." This one is a little more wordy but says essentially the same thing. Also if Christianity is so much like Islam, what are the other parallels apart from the fact that both religions follow a messiah?

-snip nevermind i cant find my source so i'm not going to back myself up, thats dumb-

While I find the bible and your arguments interesting wouldn't you guys rather prefer to go out and have some fun, or as the bible says quite a lot, "love each other" and just agree to disagree? I mean if religious arguments are your thing then by all means continue, I'm just saying that "I spent hours arguing with someone on the internet." isn't much of a story to tell the kids.

[QUOTE=nick10510;35778121]While I find the bible and your arguments interesting wouldn't you guys rather prefer to go out and have some fun, or as the bible says quite a lot, "love each other" and just agree to disagree? I mean if religious arguments are your thing then by all means continue, I'm just saying that "I spent hours arguing with someone on the internet." isn't much of a story to tell the kids.[/QUOTE] But it's just so fun.

I disagree with trying to push your beliefs on to students who aren't even out of high school yet about religion. Whether it's for or against it.

[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;35777412]I think giving us existence, free will and possible passage into an eternal paradise is enough to love him, but I can't speak for everybody.[/quote] Personally, I'd rather not exist at all than live in the kind of Universe where this mass-murdering psychopath holds all the cards. Also, free will does not exist. People have been known to make decisions as many as ten seconds prior to consciously deciding something. We're just massive chemical reactions, and our state of consciousness is essentially an illusion. Also, no go on the "paradise" thing. Eternal life in any capacity is a trap of misery for anything with an intelligent mind. Whatever god would have to do to me to prevent me from being bored out of my mind during ETERNITY, or whatever is supposed to make me absolutely happy forever and not care about the innocent people he's tossed into the everflame, I want no part in it. Oblivion is preferable every time. [quote]I would like to note that before Abraham did not end up sacrificing Jacob as God in fact made sure he did not. It's all supposed to reinforce the fact that we are meant to love him above all others. That doesn't mean murder someone in the name of God, it means put him above all other worldly things as he was the only one who created you.[/quote] No, but the sick thing is that Abraham was, in fact, going to do it. That... is reprehensible. If god were anything we might call "decent," he would be disgusted by Abraham's willingness to do such a thing, not congratulate him for his "faith". And this doesn't excuse the slaughter of human life god has directly ordered or personally carried out either. And as to this shit about "being grateful to your creator", I consider my PARENTS my "creators," and if they were abusive to me, I think nobody would blame me for rebelling or attempting to escape them. Or likewise, if I created a race of tiny robots and programmed to love me, worship me, sings songs about me and weep at the sight of my perfection, you'd call me at LEAST twisted. Regardless if god exists and is the creator, he has made it apparent by his own holy book's account of his actions that he deserves nothing less than contempt and rebellion. In the face of such a malevolent tyrant, rebellion is the [I]only [/I]moral option.

i found the girl walking out at 1:30 crying with her cross shimmering in the camera the most hilarious thing