Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Blacken]

On your statement on the Gospels... they're "all the same," yet they contradict each other? Citation needed.

Have you ever read them? Shite, they range from the tiny to the huge, in the same Gospel.

Matthew says that Jesus healed the leper before visiting the house of Simon Peter. Mark says that Jesus healed the leper afterwards.

Jairus (named in Luke, not in Matthew) approaches Jesus in Matthew and asks for help for his dying daughter. In Luke, she's already dead.

Matthew says that Jesus instructed the disciples to leave their staves and sandals at home for their journey. Mark says that Jesus told them to bring them.

Matthew and Luke both state that John the Baptist sent his followers to ask Jesus if he were the Messiah while John was imprisoned. The Gospel of John says that John the Baptist already knew.

Matthew suggests that John the Baptist was the foretold Elias. John says the opposite.



I could go on. There are reams of them. They're books by a bunch of Bronze Age herdsmen--what do you expect?

[G-Flex]

So basically "If I don't agree with it, it isn't true".  What kind of central doctrine is that?

It's not about ignoring the central doctrine. It's about a disagreement of what the central doctrine actually says.

Let me clarify something, again...

The Bible does say that homosexuality is wrong.

Sure, the same part of the Bible that says that eating shellfish is wrong, and that you should kill the women and children of another culture, or stone your own to death for disobeying you.

Before you respond to this, you might want to take a look at this: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh2.htm

It's rather interesting, and exposes one of the types of flaws inherent in having a worldview that can be fundamentally shaken by minute transcription and translation errors in a book of which you understand neither the linguistic nor cultural context (in fact, hardly anyone does).

[Lord Dakoth]

Blacken, I looked at all of the contradictions you referenced, and this is what I came up with.

In Matthew, Jesus heals the leper in chapter 8, and visits Simon's house in chapter 26. In Mark, Jesus heals the leper in chapter 1, and visit's Simon's house in chapter 14. I don't see a disagreement here. It just so happens that Simon is known as "Simon the leper," but neither book says anything about Jesus healing Simon. I would also like to point out that there is nothing in the New Testament that says that everything is listed chronologically.

It is very possible that the man said "just died" when his daughter was not dead anyways. In this case, it would be the father, not the Bible, giving false information. Either way, the daughter is dead when Jesus arrives at the house.

Matthew 10:9-10 says: "Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts, take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff..."
What we have here is a case of parallel structure. Another way to read it is, "take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or extra sandals or an extra staff..."

When John sends messengers to Jesus, I believe that he was feeling discouraged, and was starting to doubt what he had believed in the past. Quite understandable, he was in a Roman prison, not an altogether pleasant place. He was starting to doubt his former belief that Jesus really was the Messiah, and he needed encouragement.

I'm assuming that the prophecy you're referring to is the one from Malachi 4:5. Now, I admit I'm a bit more shaky on this than I would like, but what I believe is that Jesus is metaphorically comparing John the Baptist to Elias (Elijah), seeing as both John and Elias were prophets of sorts, "paving the way" for Jesus, and had pretty much the same goals.

I would be more than happy to continue this discussion via PM, or create a new topic, but I think that we aren't really contributing much to the topic's discussion.

[PTTG??]

Here's the real problem with outlawing homosexuality: How are you going to enforce it?
Mandatory bedroom cameras? A "Homo Hotline" where people can call the police to report others, which will then be followed by the police swooping in with swat teams?

The very idea that such a ban could be enforced is absurd. Even the faintest suggestion that such an attempt would be an effective use of police forces is equally absurd.

There is no need to discuss whether or not it is a "Sin" in any bible. The self-evident fact that doing so would be a violation of one's freedom of belief is enough to put such discussion away. The only thing that might counter the freedom of belief- the equal freedom from danger, or the right to be protected from those who would harm you- does not apply.

That all said, I have nothing against radical fundamentalist sects such as the Born-Again Christians, so long as they keep their religion in their house- unfortunately, it seems that one of the universal things all fundamentalist groups share is the total disregard for the rights of others.

Is anyone else rather disurbed by the fact that we are having an intense theological and political debate- one that is, I must say, remarkably civil for the internet- and yet we call each other by names like "ChairmanPoo"?

Ahhh... Bay12, land of contrasts.

[atomicwinter]

So basically "If I don't agree with it, it isn't true".  What kind of central doctrine is that?

It's not about ignoring the central doctrine. It's about a disagreement of what the central doctrine actually says.

Let me clarify something, again...

The Bible does say that homosexuality is wrong.

Sure, the same part of the Bible that says that eating shellfish is wrong, and that you should kill the women and children of another culture, or stone your own to death for disobeying you.

Before you respond to this, you might want to take a look at this: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh2.htm

It's rather interesting, and exposes one of the types of flaws inherent in having a worldview that can be fundamentally shaken by minute transcription and translation errors in a book of which you understand neither the linguistic nor cultural context (in fact, hardly anyone does).

Thank you! Now I have some ammunition when another simple minded Christan tries to tell me to follow the bible. I will simply reply "You don't even follow the F$)@ bible you ass hole!"

[Lord Dakoth]

Is anyone else rather disurbed by the fact that we are having an intense theological and political debate- one that is, I must say, remarkably civil for the internet- and yet we call each other by names like "ChairmanPoo"?

I like it how right after you remark over the civility of this discussion, some Philistine swoops in with a spammy, offensive post.

[Vester]

On your statement on the Gospels... they're "all the same," yet they contradict each other? Citation needed.

Have you ever read them? Shite, they range from the tiny to the huge, in the same Gospel.

Matthew says that Jesus healed the leper before visiting the house of Simon Peter. Mark says that Jesus healed the leper afterwards.

Jairus (named in Luke, not in Matthew) approaches Jesus in Matthew and asks for help for his dying daughter. In Luke, she's already dead.

Matthew says that Jesus instructed the disciples to leave their staves and sandals at home for their journey. Mark says that Jesus told them to bring them.

Matthew and Luke both state that John the Baptist sent his followers to ask Jesus if he were the Messiah while John was imprisoned. The Gospel of John says that John the Baptist already knew.

Matthew suggests that John the Baptist was the foretold Elias. John says the opposite.



I could go on. There are reams of them. They're books by a bunch of Bronze Age herdsmen--what do you expect?

I take offense to that. They were Iron Age herdsmen! Iron Age!

Also you forgot Luke's Sermon in the Plain versus Matthew's Sermon on the Mount. That's the one most people point out.

Here's the real problem with outlawing homosexuality: How are you going to enforce it?
Mandatory bedroom cameras? A "Homo Hotline" where people can call the police to report others, which will then be followed by the police swooping in with swat teams?

They did have sodomy as a criminal offense centuries ago. Wait, who brought up outlawing homosexuality? Wouldn't that be, like, unconstitutional?

[atomicwinter]

On your statement on the Gospels... they're "all the same," yet they contradict each other? Citation needed.

Have you ever read them? Shite, they range from the tiny to the huge, in the same Gospel.

Matthew says that Jesus healed the leper before visiting the house of Simon Peter. Mark says that Jesus healed the leper afterwards.

Jairus (named in Luke, not in Matthew) approaches Jesus in Matthew and asks for help for his dying daughter. In Luke, she's already dead.

Matthew says that Jesus instructed the disciples to leave their staves and sandals at home for their journey. Mark says that Jesus told them to bring them.

Matthew and Luke both state that John the Baptist sent his followers to ask Jesus if he were the Messiah while John was imprisoned. The Gospel of John says that John the Baptist already knew.

Matthew suggests that John the Baptist was the foretold Elias. John says the opposite.



I could go on. There are reams of them. They're books by a bunch of Bronze Age herdsmen--what do you expect?

I take offense to that. They were Iron Age herdsmen! Iron Age!

Also you forgot Luke's Sermon in the Plain versus Matthew's Sermon on the Mount. That's the one most people point out.

Here's the real problem with outlawing homosexuality: How are you going to enforce it?
Mandatory bedroom cameras? A "Homo Hotline" where people can call the police to report others, which will then be followed by the police swooping in with swat teams?

They did have sodomy as a criminal offense centuries ago. Wait, who brought up outlawing homosexuality? Wouldn't that be, like, unconstitutional?

And so was slavery, no womens rights, the killing of millions of native Americans and the extinction of many unique tribes and cultures... na! Its just the good ol US of A! *burns the flag*

[Lord Dakoth]

Also you forgot Luke's Sermon in the Plain versus Matthew's Sermon on the Mount. That's the one most people point out.

Jesus probably preached the same sermon multiple times as he went from town to town, and these are likely two different presentations of the same sermon. You don't expect a touring band to play different songs at every stop. Or a professor to give unique lectures every year.

[Vester]

I was just pointing out something he missed. Frankly, when or where it was preached doesn't matter, because the message is what does.

And so was slavery, no womens rights, the killing of millions of native Americans and the extinction of many unique tribes and cultures... na! Its just the good ol US of A! *burns the flag*

Yeah, but you guys fixed all that stuff. Outlawing homosexuality would be an epic backward step. (not that you suggested outlawing it. I'm just wondering who did.)

[PTTG??]

I perfer Han's Testament, though Chewies' in interesting. My favorite part of that is 4:21:

"Aaaaagraawww wraaaa graaaa aaaaaAAAAAAAaaaa RR. RrrrrrRRAAAAAAAA (Roar) waaagh araararrraaa! Raaaa graaaa waaaaaarrrrRRR (thumps chest)?"

[Lord Dakoth]

The thing to do is shut down all the gay/lesbian bars, fire suspected homosexuals, have an unofficial online blacklist, arrest them for invoking the Fifth Amendment, and outlaw flower-print shirts. And so help me, if I catch you watching Brokeback Mountain...

(I'm kidding of course.)

Realistically, outlawing homosexuality isn't going to happen. Outlawing homosexual marriage is where the battle's at now.

[Vester]

I'm curious, are you for it, or against it? Mind, they're fighting for something that should be a part of their rights as people.

I perfer Han's Testament, though Chewies' in interesting. My favorite part of that is 4:21:

"Aaaaagraawww wraaaa graaaa aaaaaAAAAAAAaaaa RR. RrrrrrRRAAAAAAAA (Roar) waaagh araararrraaa! Raaaa graaaa waaaaaarrrrRRR (thumps chest)?"

More heartfelt words have never before been spoken.  *sniff*. So true, Chewie. So true.

[Blacken]

Also you forgot Luke's Sermon in the Plain versus Matthew's Sermon on the Mount. That's the one most people point out.

Jesus probably preached the same sermon multiple times as he went from town to town, and these are likely two different presentations of the same sermon. You don't expect a touring band to play different songs at every stop. Or a professor to give unique lectures every year.

He's right, I did miss one.

(The authors of Matthew and Luke were both working off fragmentary source material--there are going to be discrepancies. I mean, shit, not even Sarah Palin would tell you that the New Testament was written by people who were actually there.

Well.

Maybe she would.)

[G-Flex]

The thing to do is shut down all the gay/lesbian bars, fire suspected homosexuals, have an unofficial online blacklist, arrest them for invoking the Fifth Amendment, and outlaw flower-print shirts. And so help me, if I catch you watching Brokeback Mountain...

(I'm kidding of course.)

Realistically, outlawing homosexuality isn't going to happen. Outlawing homosexual marriage is where the battle's at now.

Why?

Why is any of this necessary?
Why do you need to outlaw something simply because your religion forbids it?

The only reason: To enforce the laws of your religion on people who don't even belong to it.

Christianity is supposed to be about free will, and the choice to do what's right. There's a big difference between that and forcing people to not engage in a sin that harms no one but themselves, and especially not forcing people who don't belong to the religion in the first place, and especially not hijacking a secular governmental authority in order to do it.


This is, of course, assuming there's a Christian biblical basis for it in the first place, which I believe there is not. Certainly nothing in the New Testament, and nothing in the Old Testament except in the old laws I mentioned that have essentially been written out of dogma.