Tennessee gay couple physically attacked by pastor and deacons for trying to go to church, pastor wa
177 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;32622972]Hell is here to prevent people from doing shit. It was killing, stealing and cheating on your wife/husban back then, and with time illiterate priests turned it into more or less everything possible.[/QUOTE]
With time?
Have you read the old testament?
It STARTED as a fucked up sexist, racist, homophobic, slavery-endorsing, violent religion.
There was a reason the Romans, who were probably the single most accepting society from a religious standpoint in the history of the world, elected to burn Christians and attack them with dogs.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32623043]With time?
Have you read the old testament?
It STARTED as a fucked up sexist, racist, homophobic, slavery-endorsing, violent religion.
There was a reason the Romans, who were probably the single most accepting society from a religious standpoint in the history of the world, elected to burn Christians and attack them with dogs.[/QUOTE]
Yeah good thing the new testament came by and taught love and understanding.
But fuck that thing let's only remember the ultra-old archaic document instead, it's so much more convenient to take THAT one for your argument !
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;32623100]Yeah good thing the new testament came by and taught love and understanding.
But fuck that thing let's only remember the ultra-old archaic document instead, it's so much more convenient to take THAT one for your argument ![/QUOTE]
Unless you are a woman! Then you are just a slave to men.
Go go gadget, New Testament!
"But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man,[a] and the head of Christ is God." Corinthians 11:3
"A woman[a] should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women[c] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety."
1 Timothy 2:11
"Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. 9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God."
1 Timothy 2:8
"Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives,"
1 peter 3:1
[QUOTE=Zoran;32618133]Yet they still wear those scars with pride.
The stupid assed ones do at least
My mom's pastor friend posted this on Facebook. I doubt he knows what a crusade is
[IMG]http://filesmelt.com/dl/Jihad.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
which is why arabs are all christian right
silly blindly religious folk
[QUOTE=GunFox;32623142]Unless you are a woman! Then you are just a slave to men.
Go go gadget, New Testament!
"But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man,[a] and the head of Christ is God." Corinthians 11:3
"A woman[a] should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women[c] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety."
1 Timothy 2:11
"Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. 9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God."
1 Timothy 2:8
"Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives,"
1 peter 3:1[/QUOTE]
I still wonder why anti-religion know more about the bible than actual christians do.
Are you THAT concerned with religion ?
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;32623100]let's only remember the [B]ultra-old archaic document[/B] instead, it's so much more convenient to take THAT one for your argument ![/QUOTE]
uh.... this is the year 2000 AD/CE. both are terribly old
[editline]5th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;32623181]I still wonder why anti-religion know more about the bible than actual christians do.
Are you THAT concerned with religion ?[/QUOTE]
Most anti-religious people actually grew up in a fairly religious environment, they've just taken a far more critical eye to what they've been told to accept.
[editline]5th October 2011[/editline]
also not actually anything to refute his point
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;32623181]I still wonder why anti-religion know more about the bible than actual christians do.
Are you THAT concerned with religion ?[/QUOTE]
Yes.
You destroyed the Romans, a society which withstood everything the world had to throw at it for over two thousand years, and you are destroying us too.
Technology may have changed, but we are still but men. The vulnerabilities that were present then, are still present now.
So why couldn't he press charges?
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;32623279]So why couldn't he press charges?[/QUOTE]
He can and did.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32623243]Yes.
You destroyed the Romans, a society which withstood everything the world had to throw at it for over two thousand years, and you are destroying us too.
Technology may have changed, but we are still but men. The vulnerabilities that were present then, are still present now.[/QUOTE]
I'm not christian. I don't even follow a religion.
Romans weren't destroyed by religion, they were destroyed because their so-called perfect system was based on the decisions of a single man who eventually failed at leading an entire empire (which was based on WAR AND SLAVERY, talk about respect).
Also it's not because the bible contains three passages of three guys (did I mention AT LEAST thirteen guys wrote the thing ?) that it instantly is a piece of unacceptable garbage. It's also not because three morons in the south decided gays are bad that the entirety of Christians are homophobic morons. If anything, you are the intolerant prick for making such big shortcuts and assuming religion is essentially bad without any sort of redeemable quality.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;32623374]I'm not christian. I don't even follow a religion.
Romans weren't destroyed by religion, they were destroyed because their so-called perfect system was based on the decisions of a single man who eventually failed at leading an entire empire [/quote]
After the Christians had slowly poked holes in their society and undermined their entire system for a few centuries.
[quote](which was based on WAR AND SLAVERY, talk about respect).[/quote]
They were by no means a happy people. Their society was based around public duty and extreme imperialism. An impressive feat which demands respect, but they were not happy folks.
[quote]Also it's not because the bible contains three passages of three guys (did I mention AT LEAST thirteen guys wrote the thing ?) that it instantly is a piece of unacceptable garbage. It's also not because three morons in the south decided gays are bad that the entirety of Christians are homophobic morons. If anything, you are the intolerant prick for making such big shortcuts and assuming religion is essentially bad without any sort of redeemable quality.[/QUOTE]
Every argument:
"Christianity is a religion of peace!"
"Not according to the old testament"
"nobody listens to the old testament"
"Okay well here are parts of the new testament which aren't nice either"
"Nobody listens to those parts"
Somewhere there must be an abridged bible that specifies what parts you are supposed to read and what parts are crazy people. Because from where I am sitting, it just looks like you dismiss everything that doesn't fit with your vision of what you think Christianity is.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32623565]Because from where I am sitting, it just looks like you dismiss everything that doesn't fit with your vision of what you think Christianity is.[/QUOTE]
How strange, you do the exact same thing.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;32623598]How strange, you do the exact same thing.[/QUOTE]
Where.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32623685]Where.[/QUOTE]
How about the whole "taking three quotes from the bible and claiming the entire book is misogynistic and shitty" part ?
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;32623743]How about the whole "taking three quotes from the bible and claiming the entire book is misogynistic and shitty" part ?[/QUOTE]
If you are not "selecting picking and choosing parts" of the Bible, you must utilize [I]all[/I] of it, and as parts of it are misogynistic and shitty, this means the end result is following something which is misogynistic and shiity.
[QUOTE=Contag;32623783]If you are not "selecting picking and choosing parts" of the Bible, you must utilize [I]all[/I] of it, and as parts of it are misogynistic and shitty, this means the end result is following something which is misogynistic and shiity.[/QUOTE]
The bible was written by a group of persons
Taking it as a whole regardless of the fact it was written in parts is silly, especially considering there had to be divergences of opinion in the group (notice how two of his lines are from the same guy).
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;32623862]The bible was written by a group of persons
Taking it as a whole regardless of the fact it was written in parts is silly, especially considering there had to be divergences of opinion in the group (notice how two of his lines are from the same guy).[/QUOTE]
So in other words...
[quote]it just looks like you dismiss everything that doesn't fit with your vision of what you think Christianity is.[/quote]
I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I'm pretty sure it's logically impossible to follow the entirety of the bible at once due to contradictions.
[QUOTE=Contag;32623957]I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I'm pretty sure it's logically impossible to follow the entirety of the bible at once due to contradictions.[/QUOTE]
It is impossible but I don't really like it when Gunfox blames me for considering the Bible a group work while he does the same thing basically
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/7951825/michael-jackson-eating-popcorn.gif[/img]
Religious threads make for some great read.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;32623862]The bible was written by a group of persons
Taking it as a whole regardless of the fact it was written in parts is silly, especially considering there had to be divergences of opinion in the group (notice how two of his lines are from the same guy).[/QUOTE]
So which parts do you accept?
Which parts do you ignore?
How are you following a religion at all, when your holy text is completely unreliable?
What about the really fun stuff that was removed by the church?
Like in the Gospel of Thomas 5:1 where Jesus kills a kid?
"1 And after some days as Jesus walked with Joseph through the city, there ran one of the children and smoteJesus on the arms: but Jesus said unto him: So finish thou thy course. And immediately he fell to the earthand died."
[url]http://www.scribd.com/doc/5486118/Lost-Books-of-The-Bible-Gospel-of-Thomas-Text-Infancy-4[/url]
Some kid bumps into Jesus and Jesus wastes him.
Or when Jesus stumbles into a cave full of dragons and turns out to be a dragon tamer:
" And, lo, suddenly there came forth from the cave many dragons; and when the children saw them, they cried out in great terror. Then Jesus went down from the bosom of His mother, and stood on His feet before the dragons; and they adored Jesus, and thereafter retired. "
Apocrypha contains some fun stuff, that is just the tip of the iceberg. Who is to say that any of it is false? But if none of it is false, or all of it is suspect, how is anyone Christian? How are any claims made?
The answer is nobody is Christian and the entire fucking text is a ridiculous fairy tale.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32624048]And, lo, suddenly there came forth from the cave many dragons; and when the children saw them, they cried out in great terror. Then Jesus went down from the bosom of His mother, and stood on His feet before the dragons; and they adored Jesus, and thereafter retired. [/QUOTE]
wow jesus was so much cooler than I ever imagined
[QUOTE=Contag;32624086]wow jesus was so much cooler than I ever imagined[/QUOTE]jesus loved rrerr
[QUOTE=Fables;32617825]You know it's not just limited to Christianity right? It's other minor religions along with all Abrahamic Religions that the majority practice homophobic beliefs. So that's basically 1/2 people on this planet.[/QUOTE]
Except pretty much all hate on gays comes from christianity/islam(same thing, really), people were fine with them before then, hell, in greece it was totally fine that the students slept with their teacher.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32623565]After the Christians had slowly poked holes in their society and undermined their entire system for a few centuries. [/quote]
No it didn't. Learn some history.
[quote]They were by no means a happy people. Their society was based around public duty and extreme imperialism. An impressive feat which demands respect, but they were not happy folks. [/quote]
So the Romans are so tolerant and understanding when they enslave each other an persecute minor religions, right? Don't even make the argument that the Empire was some tolerant force. They used some tolerance as a means to assimilating people into the Empire, but that only goes so far.
[quote]Every argument:
"Christianity is a religion of peace!"
"Not according to the old testament"
"nobody listens to the old testament"
"Okay well here are parts of the new testament which aren't nice either"
"Nobody listens to those parts"
Somewhere there must be an abridged bible that specifies what parts you are supposed to read and what parts are crazy people. Because from where I am sitting, it just looks like you dismiss everything that doesn't fit with your vision of what you think Christianity is.[/QUOTE]
There is a core message to each holy text. So what if the New Testament preaches misogyny in some parts? Overwhelmingly it teaches forgiveness of those who don't follow the rules. It teaches that you probably should follow the rules, but it is completely alright not to. It teaches that we should also not enforce our morality on other people.
So if people wanna follow the parts you call "misogynist"(they really aren't, they are chauvinist, which is different), then why the fuck shouldn't they willingly follow that? If they don't, it doesn't mean they are doing anything wrong by the bible.
[editline]4th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Crimor;32624587]Except pretty much all hate on gays comes from christianity/islam(same thing, really), people were fine with them before then, hell, in greece it was totally fine that the students slept with their teacher.[/QUOTE]
No it didn't. Homosexuality has been accepted in many cultures and been hated in many cultures.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;32623862]The bible was written by a group of persons
Taking it as a whole regardless of the fact it was written in parts is silly, especially considering there had to be divergences of opinion in the group (notice how two of his lines are from the same guy).[/QUOTE]
And both beliefs are derived from Deuteronomy, a book which is literally [I]nothing but hatespeech.[/I]
And it's the book of old testament [I]law[/I]. Yeah.
[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;32625240]And both beliefs are derived from Deuteronomy, a book which is literally [I]nothing but hatespeech.[/I]
And it's the book of old testament [I]law[/I]. Yeah.[/QUOTE]
Law that doesn't have to be followed according to the New Testament.
[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;32625240]And both beliefs are derived from Deuteronomy, a book which is literally [I]nothing but hatespeech.[/I]
And it's the book of old testament [I]law[/I]. Yeah.[/QUOTE]
The old testament is outdated as fuck. It's barely reliable.
I know the new testament is also old but not as old and not even written in the same goal.
[editline]4th October 2011[/editline]
Hence yawnmen
[QUOTE=yawmwen;32625276]Law that doesn't have to be followed according to the New Testament.[/QUOTE]
Even the New Testament has a lot that is awful stuff, how do you (not necessarily "you") decide to ignore that?
[QUOTE=yawmwen;32625172]No it didn't. Learn some history.[/quote]
Whew, such a good comeback there.
[quote]So the Romans are so tolerant and understanding when they enslave each other an persecute minor religions, right? Don't even make the argument that the Empire was some tolerant force. They used some tolerance as a means to assimilating people into the Empire, but that only goes so far.
[/QUOTE]
The Romans were pragmatic. Religion was central to Roman society, but the specifics of said religion were largely unimportant. So, in their imperial dickbag ways, when they took over a new region, they simply adopted all of the local gods into their religion.
Provided your god wasn't the god of baby anal rape, or some other problem causer, they would gladly accept them. Not because they were nice or tolerant, but simply because it was in the best interest of the empire. This is how concerned Roman society was with the well being of the empire as a whole.
Buuuut then Christianity comes along. Judaism had largely not proven to be a problem, but Christianity was more outspoken as a whole. The Romans had a bunch of gods and many people worshipped different gods, but the Christians come along screaming that there is only one god and that all of the Romans are going to hell. This didn't sit well with them. Hundreds of years of Christians slowly seeping into Roman society eventually saw a widespread social breakdown where leadership orders one thing, but the locals do a completely different thing. Social breakdown lead to economic failure and economic failure lead to military failure. On came the hordes.
Despite the connotations of the term slavery, the Romans were considerably more fair about it than most of the era. Hell they were more fair than Europe and the US when we decided slavery was fun. Roman slaves were almost universally prisoners serving a sentence or prisoners of war. You were permitted to save money and purchase your freedom. Once free you had the same rights as anyone else. Again, it wasn't because they were nice, it was simple pragmatism. Killing or imprisoning people for committing crimes served no purpose. Repatriating prisoners of war lead to rebellions because the Romans were there to conquer. So repatriating them would basically be like placing rebels back into your own population. Furthermore the Romans generally liked to attempt a peaceful military annexation prior to invasion to keep their costs down, the fact that nobody would be turned into slaves or murdered during the invasion, was a handy method of enticing support.
They were not nice, they were not even really tolerant, they were just pragmatic.
[QUOTE=GunFox;32625679]They were not nice, they were not even really tolerant, they were just pragmatic.[/QUOTE]
Which in a sense is worse than having three guys in the countryside being homophobe because of religion.
An entire empire vs a bunch of rednecks
[editline]4th October 2011[/editline]
And Christianity was persecuted because Judaism saw a big problem in that new religion, as jews had strong commercial links with Romans and wanted to keep this advantage, so they blamed Christians for all their problems and Romans took measures against the so called trouble makers.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.