Nothing like a hot cup of sacrilege in the morning
Jesus Christ had no problems with slavery. Idgaf what he thought/thinks about homosexuality.
Also he’s fictional.
Downvote me. Do it.
@I Are Lebo, he could've been real. Not as the son of god, but, like, just some dude
@mattswife, I think it was some real smooth talker that just knew how to bullshjt his way around, basically he was the best salesman of all time.
@I Are Lebo, Jessus, like Mohammed and buddha was a historical figure, the miracles and teachings are a whole seprate issue.
@Kliment Voroshilov, there is clear historical evidence for the existence of Mohammed and Buddha in ways there simply isn’t for Jesus. There is significant evidence that the character of Jesus is actually an amalgamation of several itinerant travelling Rabbis, which were a common sight in that age. This is why the stories vary so greatly in tone, from a Jesus that is humble and modest to a self aggrandizing one that openly proclaims himself to be the Messiah.
His very name leads credence to him NOT being a historical figure, given that a) Jesus is not a Jewish name, b) Christ is not a surname, but a title, and c) Jews did not have surnames until the Napoleonic era, when the edict was passed down in order to census the Jewish population.
@mattswife, there is absolutely zero extra-biblical evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ. Yes, he could have been real, but there is no evidence-based reason to believe so.
@I Are Lebo, as someone who I've seen be logical in other posts, it baffles me to always see you post with such clear bias and ignorance about Christianity.
You think you are wise, but all you do is exaggerate and take things out of context to misrepresent a group of people who have done a lot of good in the world by following the bible.
And you can point to history, but you know wo else has a history of screwing up? Everyone. And pretty much every Christian today will tell you the Bible doesn't condone any of those heinous acts.
So why do you think your interpretation matters more than the people who actually believe and follow the bible.
There's nothing brave about trying to rudely impose belief OR your disbelieve on others.
@TomPholio, I make no denial that I’m biased against religion, Christianity in particular. But it’s not borne of ignorance. I have some history with Christians and have done extensive research into the topic. I admit that most of the time I phrase these things in a particularly aggressive or even provocative manner, but the truth is simply that apart from enjoying the reaction it gets me, it also is the best way I’ve found of actually starting a conversation that isn’t just pointless and dull from the get go. Just my opinion on it.
On to the actual topic matter, the Catholic Church is a criminal organization and the good that they do in the world is massively eclipsed by the evil they do.
The bible condones every single one of those acts. This is why I’m so unforgiving on this matter. The bible condones slavery, genocide, and all sorts of depraved behaviour in the name of God. The people like you don’t follow the bible and that’s precisely what makes you good people. Populism doesn’t
override the actual content of the book.
I’m being 100% serious when I say you should read your bible. And alone, not in a study group. Actually read what it says and not just the twisting and mental gymnastics needed to make passages like Leviticus 25 or Exodus 21 seem morally acceptable.
A better source for these arguments than me is Matt Dillahunty. He was a southern Baptist for 25 years and is very active on YouTube and other social media.
I am not against Christians. I am against Christianity. The religion is a poison that is directly responsible for countless atrocities. Charity work doesn’t negate that. This is true to varying degrees based on which subset of Christianity, but the Catholics are the worst.
I’m not afraid to speak the truth as I see it and I will happily defend any point I’ve made or concede defeat if I cannot and change my mind. Can you say the same?
@I Are Lebo, Muhammad Ghandi was racist
@I Are Lebo, you sure talk a lot of ignorance...
1) Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper's possession. Exodus 21:16... you confuse slavery with endentured servitude.
2) jesus is his English name, you know like how many names dont translate directly. Or in this case the English translation of the latan of the Greek of the Hebrew. But in Hebrew Jesus is Yeshua, or more commonly pronounced Joshua.
3) Christ isnt a surname, it's a title. Meaning the anointed one. Most people know this, but with ignorance like you are showing a better translation would be Jesus The Christ... you can see it being used as a title here for example...Mat 24:24 KJV For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets,....
So ya, you have no clue what you talk about. You dont have to agree with the bible, but dont be ignorant about what it actually says, it just makes you look foolish...
@I Are Lebo, 4) if there is no religious truth that there is a God who defines objective morals, than morals are meaningless. All morality then is mans subjective opinion. Or a groups opinion. But you clearly reject the group majority opinion that God is real an makes the rules... so that makes you a hypocrite.
5) catholisim is not Christian, its pagan tradition combined with Christian traditions.
6) the bible condemn catholisim.
@whatthefrank, did you mean Mahatma Ghandi? And yes, very much so. Openly despised black people.
No human being is perfect, and when it came to the practice of nonviolent resistance, Ghandi was a great man. When it came to not being a prejudicial ass, not so much.
@phalcon , 1) the purchasing and owning of human beings, to rule over as you see fit and pass them as property onto your heirs is condoned by the bible. That is indefensible. Indentured servitude is deeply immoral on its own, but you are wrong. I am talking about SLAVERY in the bible. The fact that you are not permitted to capture your own slaves but must “buy your slaves from the foreigners among you” is completely irrelevant.
2) Jesus isn’t an English name either, and having your Saviour continue to go by a mistranslated name (Yeshua is Hebrew for Joshua) is like continuing to call the native Americans Indians because some Italian shmuck was lost and thought he was in India.
3) Jesus Christ is referred to as such for about a hundred years before Christianity was founded as a religion. Who thought of the title to have given it to him in the first place? Even if he was real he wouldn’t have been referred to as Christ within his lifetime.
@I Are Lebo, do you believe there is a heaven or hell?
4) I do not believe that objective morality exists, but even if it did, God being the source makes no sense. If God determines what is moral and what is immoral, that’s still subjective morality. This can be shown how God can command humanity that murder and rape is forbidden, but then tell the Israelites to slaughter the sodomites and take the virginal daughters for their own.
If what God says is moral is moral simply because God says it, then you don’t have a moral system, you simply have moral edicts. Not the same thing at all.
What’s more, you have to already have a moral framework in order to get morals from the bible, because otherwise you would have no reason to reject the commandment to murder your unruly child, or to stone to death your local homosexual (both commandments being explicit in Deuteronomy).
It’s hypocrisy. The very same chapter that calls out homosexuality as a sin forbids the consumption of shellfish or the wearing of mixed fabrics. Do you wear polyester?
@I Are Lebo, Ghandi also refused to let his wife receive treatment for her illness out of principle which led to her death, and then took said treatment when he received the same illness with no hesitation :)
@whatthefrank, I have no reason to believe there is a heaven beyond wishful thinking. As for Hell, not only do I not believe in Hell as it’s been described, but it’s very existence would completely undermine the existence of a omnipotent and benevolent deity.
Here’s a better question. Why do you believe something for which there is absolutely no evidence on the word of people you’ve never met and cannot possibly verify?
@I Are Lebo, I’m not religious either but it’s pretty widely agreed amongst most historians that Jesus was in fact a real person. That said, he likely didn’t perform any miracles, but was probably just a very influential prophet. It’s also never stated he was okay with slavery. Not tryna be rude.
@I Are Lebo, it’s called faith, lost one. To believe we exist only to live a painful life then to die is something I will not accept. People like you exist (evil soulless people), therefore the complete opposite must also exist (righteous angels of God)
@phalcon , but most importantly, Jesus (whether he existed or not) wasn't white!
@Midnite St0rm, five hundred years ago it was widely agreed upon that the world was flat. That’s called the Argument From Populism, and it’s a fallacious argument.
It is in fact stated that he was okay with slavery. Ephesians 6:5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (That’s New Testament, not OT)
There is another passage that I do not currently remember the number for where Jesus himself, addressing a crowd of people, instructs the slaves to obey their masters. “Not only the kind ones, but the cruel ones also.”
Being okay with your society practicing slavery is supporting slavery.
@whatthefrank, faith is gullibility. Faith is the excuse people give when they do not have a rational reason to believe something.
When you have evidence and reason, you don’t need to appeal to faith.
The very idea that you think of me as lost or evil or soulless shows how badly indoctrinated you are. Being condescending, irrational, and ignorant doesn’t make you righteous.
Also, I never argued that existence is pointless. Neither of us know the reason why we are here or what purpose there is to our lives. The difference between us is I’m not pretending that I know.
@mattswife, that’s something I’ve always found hilarious. How Jesus’s ethnicity changes depending on where you are because so many people fundamentally reject a Saviour that isn’t their own race.
Chinese Jesus is especially hilarious to me, but the prevalence of a euro centric Christ model is particularly funny given the background for the character being middle eastern.
@I Are Lebo, it’s better than being afraid when rationality isn’t present.
So you claim to have a soul?
I actually know my purpose and the reason for my existence on this earth, but you will never accept how wrong you are even though you have no idea.
@whatthefrank, right back at you. I’m at least willing to examine my own beliefs and adjust accordingly if I learn that I’m wrong. You’re so thoroughly indoctrinated any evidence that disproves your perspective will simply be dismissed by you.
It doesn’t make you a good person.
@I Are Lebo, but I’m not afraid because of faith. So no just at you.
No, YOU are indoctrinated. So much that you failed to answer the questioning you have a soul.
@I Are Lebo, alright, I’ll concede that point about slavery. However, this is a little more than the Earth being flat. They didn’t have the technology available to determine that at the time. Today with Jesus, his existence is mostly accepted by historians, who are experts in that field. Back when the Earth was believed to be flat astronomers were still coming forward and saying “no it’s not.”
@Midnite St0rm, no, God was not in favor of Slavery. So much, that, he wiped out the Egyptians for enslaving the Israelites and lead them through the Red Sea.
@whatthefrank, I don’t even know if a soul is real, I simply don’t assume so, unlike you.
You are the one who asserted that I am an evil, soulless person. Which is also counter to your own religious teachings, which is that everyone is redeemable. So you’re both indoctrinated AND a hypocrite.
What pray tell am I supposedly indoctrinated in? You are the one arguing for things you have no evidence of.
@whatthefrank, God had the Israelites enslave others, and he stopped Pharoah from releasing the slaves so he could keep nuking them with plagues.
Also, just so you know, the story of the Exodus is demonstrably false. Jews were never held in Egypt in such large numbers. There is zero archeological evidence supporting that and lots contradicting it.
@I Are Lebo, listen man, there’s no need to insult anybody here. And that goes for everyone else in this thread too.
@Midnite St0rm, untrue. The first person to demonstrate that the earth is round did so centuries before Christ. Ancient Greeks like Pythagoras did the math and were correct as early as 600 BC.
No modern historians accept Jesus as being historical. That’s a straight up false statement. The people who claim that are mythicists, not historians.
And no, astronomers were not coming forward and saying “no it’s not” because those who did were murdered by the church for it. Galileo was imprisoned most of his life just for pushing forward the heliocentric model.
@I Are Lebo, it is not an assumption. Just as cells, our breathe, and elements and invisible to the eye but exist: so does the soul.
You clearly aren’t seeking redemption to God, therefore are not. That’s like saying everyone can be forgiven but I don’t want it because I didn’t do anything wrong and also you don’t exist. You’re a joke my man.
I don’t need evidence. God does not need to prove themselves to us, we need to prove ourselves to God.
@I Are Lebo, you can take a look at the Wikipedia for historicity of Jesus if you want where the first paragraph states that historians find his existence to be effectively certain.
@whatthefrank, also, you throw out at me my not answering a question from you when you completely ignored my question about why YOU believe in heaven and hell. So you’re a hypocrite in that regard, too.
@Midnite St0rm, who did I insult and when?
@I Are Lebo, you called the other user an evil soulless person. Granted they did the same to you. But there’s no need for either of you to say things like that.
@I Are Lebo, to believe in God and not in heaven or hell is kind of redundant so I don’t need to answer. But you dodge all things God in regards to your life which makes you one of Satans.
@whatthefrank, “I don’t need to answer your question but you dodge things you don’t believe in.”
It’s genuinely like talking to a brick wall with you. You have zero desire to understand other people’s point of view. You are truly an unempathatic person who mistakes self righteousness for virtue.
@Midnite St0rm, I never did that. He called me that. Go reread the comment. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
@Midnite St0rm, also, Wikipedia is open source. That means literally nothing. I could go onto that page and change it right now if I wanted to.
@I Are Lebo, yeah but you still said that back to him. look, I’m sorry but I really don’t wanna argue here of all places. This is supposed to be my internet safe space where I don’t have to worry about this kinda thing. Otherwise I’d go to Reddit.
@I Are Lebo, You mean the point of view of yours that completely goes against all that I believe in? Definitely not going to understand your “empathy”
Just remember the devil and all his angels only have one purpose: to lead the children of God astray, to not see heaven just as they won’t. But what were your intentions again?
@Midnite St0rm, no, I didn’t. I quoted him back at him. I don’t think he is evil, I think he’s indoctrinated.
Don’t put words in my mouth and then attempt to morally grandstand to me about it. That’s reprehensible.
This is not your space, your desire for safe spaces makes you weak, and if you cannot handle honest opinions and principled discussion, then you shouldn’t be on the internet at all.
@whatthefrank, my intentions are to live as good a life I can while believing as many true things and as few false things as possible.
What’s YOUR intention?
@whatthefrank, also just so you know, there’s plenty of religions with a God but no Hell, and even more with a God but no Heaven. Judaism doesn’t have a Hell, and Buddhism doesn’t have a heaven. So your counter argument is entirely invalid.
@I Are Lebo, the very same haha but God is the truth
@whatthefrank, the truth is that you are going to believe whatever you want for whatever reasons you can justify to yourself, and neither logic nor reason will factor into that in the slightest.
You do you. But I have more enjoyable ways to waste time than arguing something with someone who isn’t listening.
@I Are Lebo, yet they all go by the same Bible, which states there is a hell and heaven, so they wouldn’t know God if they came to earth in any shape or form.
@I Are Lebo, I don’t listen to lies.
@whatthefrank, no, they don’t. Which further shows your ignorance. Buddhism doesn’t use the bible, and there are plenty of differences between the Torah and the Bible. Including the addition of Hell.
@whatthefrank, yeah you do. You listened to all of the lies that your priest told you.
@whatthefrank, This goes back to one of my original arguments. A God that punishes a good person because they don’t believe without evidence in him is not a just God. Thats a petty God. Because punishing someone over something so petty is not justice.
For example you may fit into this category because you can’t make a good argument without trying to scare somebody to believing what you believe. When religion loses its ability to scare people into believing it. What has it become? They sound like those people standing on a street claiming it’s the end of the world to many people now.
A person that has to believe in a divine reward in order to be a good person. Is actually piece of sh!t person.
@Midnite St0rm, you are a liar. At no point in this discussion did I call anyone evil or soulless. The most I’ve called anyone is a hypocrite (and now calling you a liar).
If you can’t handle objective reality and heated discussion, you’re not mature enough to be here. You came to ME, and responded to ME. If you can’t handle the answer, that’s your problem, not mine.
@whatthefrank, there’s an interesting thing you might not realize. When you judge others. When you claim they’re going to hell and believe you’re not or believe you’re somehow rewarded with heaven over other people. (Which is what it appears you have done by claiming someone is Soulless.) A little bit of vanity there. Falls into the don’t take the Lords name in vain category.
Vain or vanity. Is when you try to use God‘s name to rise your status above others. Its also when you try to make yourself feel better because you believe in something that someone else doesn’t. As you appear to be doing.
Reconsider your fire and brimstone method of spreading the Lords name. That tactic doesn’t work on everybody. It’s obvious not going to work with the persons you’ve been talking with here. You weaken your position and just look pompous. Because it looks to me like you yourself don’t even practice what you preach. Which is called being a hypocrite. Also a form of taking the Lords name in vain.
@I Are Lebo, I’d actually say realizing the argument isn’t worth it and walking away is actually not immature at all. But dude, it’s a meme man, come on. No need for an argument in the first place.
@Midnite St0rm, the meme isn’t the point. You virtue signalled all over me while not responding or addressing whatthefrank’s comments at all. You jumped in to condescend to me and I’m responding to that by telling you exactly where you can shove it.
If you want to have an actual discussion or debate, I’d love to. I’d treat you with the same respect you treat me. But when you come in like a white knight and accuse me of things I did not do, I’m not going to stand for that. It’s disingenuous, it’s condescending, and it’s far more rude than tossing an insult at someone over a meme.
@I Are Lebo, "I do not believe that objective morality exists" - you
"Indentured servitude is deeply immoral on its on" - you
Do you even see your own hypocrisy? You're full of double speak and you dont even agree with your own opinions.
Lol, this is the problem in having a conversation with people like you... you make up the rules as you go, and even violating your own rules isn't against your own rules...
@whatthefrank, I’ve recently come to think that if God didn’t want us to use the knowledge we gained by eating from the tree he would’ve taken it away. Instead he left us with it before casting us out of the garden of Eden.
I don’t have faith that there’s oxygen in the air. There’s evidence to prove that there is.
Evidence proves the existence of something. Doubt is the catalyst that creates evidence.
Faith is to believe without proof. And while not always a bad thing. Blind faith is to follow without question. And that’s always a bad thing. Because to follow without question means to more easily be susceptible to being tricked.
@I Are Lebo, If He's not real then I'm guessing I'm not real either? Checkmate, Therapists!
@I Are Lebo, just wanna hear your thoughts on this. Everything evolves. Animals, peoples personalities, and cultures. God does not expect people to follow the old or new testament to the letter in the day we are in. It wouldn't make sense for anyone. When slavery was condoned, it was an okay practice. It is no longer ok, but back then, if a slave disobeyed his master, especially if he was cruel, he was probably killed. I'd say telling people to not get themselves killed, or at least physically punished, is sound advice. If Jesus had come out and said "slave owners, release all your slaves!" People would have called him a hack, and all "credibility" he had would have been lost. But as I said before, at least with my religion, you're not supposed to follow the bible to a T, because it doesn't fit with our Era. I'm not looking to argue or anything, I just wanna know your opinion. Also, what are your thoughts on the Book of Mormon?
@Seohn, That's actually a very popular LDS belief. That Adam and Eve didn't have the knowledge and ability to procreate in the Garden of Eden, and that the commandment to not partake of the fruit completely contradicted the commandment to "multiply and replenish the earth." Therefore, it was more of a "you're not ready" kind of thing, but it was his intention all along.
@Pyvin, there wa also no death before they ate... So no need to procreate.
@phalcon , I have been completely consistent with my attitudes and arguments. Not believing in objective morality is not the same thing as not believing in morality at all.
Objective morality is the concept of prescriptive morals. That what is right and wrong is independent of context or perspective. I disagree with this. Morality is based on a subjective framework, and once we have that framework we can make objective assessments about specific issues.
Based on the subjective moral framework of well-being, we know that torture is objectively immoral, because it negatively affects well-being. However, there are some necessary medical treatments that to the laymen are indistinguishable from torture. That doesn’t make it immoral.
Nothing I have said here has been hypocritical, and your attempt, not to counter my argument but dismiss it, is entirely invalid.
@I Are Lebo, There is extra-Biblical evidence for the existence of Jesus as a person, far more actually than for ether Muhammad or Buddha, I’m not really sure where you are getting your information but you’re pretty ignorant from the sounds of it. I mean, historians don’t even debate the existence of the historical Jesus anymore, if you look at reputable secular sources (not atheist propaganda sites) you will see there is virtually a consensus about this. I’m not try to be mean here, but wow dude, you sound like a flat earther or anti-vaxxer right now, people debate Jesus’s divinity, not his existence.
@Good Guy Satan, I’d be infinitely more likely to be a satanist than a catholic, so I guess that IS checkmate. Lmao.
@Pyvin, I think your assertion that slavery was EVER morally acceptable is entirely without merit. If God could condemn adultery, which is demonstrably harmful, then he could have easily condemned slavery.
Jesus said many things to people that were received that way. Condemning slavery wasn’t one of them.
I’m sorry, but that’s a REALLY weak argument.
As for what I think about the Book of Mormon, sorry to be so blunt, but I honestly think it was a crock of shït put out by a known con artist.
@Block1187, I have no idea what you are talking about. I’ve done extensive research about this, there is no consensus among secular historians that Jesus Christ of Nazereth was real. You’re talking out of your ass.
We have records of Mohammed and Buddha. There are no verified records of Jesus Christ outside of Christians writing about someone they believe is real.
@I Are Lebo, Read the works of Bart Ehrman (a secular agnostic scholar of religious studies) for starters. The consensus amongst those who work in the fields of near-eastern studies and classical history is that Jesus as a historical figure existed. In fact, the Christ Myth Theory (the theory that Christ was always a mythological figure and never existed as a person) is considered a fringe theory within those fields. So, yes, by most accounts of those whose life’s work it has been to study the history of the near east, classical history, and religions themselves, Jesus in fact existed. Seriously, read the scholarly work, no reputable department of near eastern studies, religious studies, or history actively puts forth material the claims Jesus never existed as a person. I’m sorry to say by the scholarly consensus is against you completely. You believe in a fringe theory that in the last 50-100 years has lost almost of its credibility.
@I Are Lebo, Read the works of Bart Ehrman (a secular agnostic scholar of religious studies) for starters. The consensus amongst those who work in the fields of near-eastern studies and classical history is that Jesus as a historical figure existed. In fact, the Christ Myth Theory (the theory that Christ was always a mythological figure and never existed as a person) is considered a fringe theory within those fields. So, yes, by most accounts of those whose life’s work it has been to study the history of the near east, classical history, and religions themselves, Jesus in fact existed. Seriously, read the scholarly work, no reputable department of near eastern studies, religious studies, or history actively puts forth material that claims Jesus never existed as a person. I’m sorry to say but the scholarly consensus is against you completely. You believe in a fringe theory that in the last 50-100 years has lost almost all of its credibility.
@Block1187, I will look into this and get back to you.
@I Are Lebo, Hey, I never said slavery was morally acceptable. I just said it was something that was happening and people were ok with it. People were not ok with adultery. People 1800 years later said slavery was bad, and it started the bloodiest war in American history. Slavery is a cut and dry case nowadays, but it was incredibly more controversial back then than you're giving it credit for. But yeah, I just wanted your opinion on that. It's all good.
@Pyvin, you said “when slavery was condoned, it was an okay practice”.
When slavery was performed in the USA, the exact same justification was used. That the bible supported it.
@I Are Lebo, it's a fun way to get rid of the Jehovah's Witnesses that come to your door
@I Are Lebo, I mean, I guess if you wanna get hung up on the wording, you do you.
@Pyvin, I was getting hung up on the message, not the words. According to your own religious text, Jesus stood up on many occasions to deliver messages that were unpopular. His entire ‘turn the other cheek’ thing was never very well received, and in the end he was brutally murdered for saying such things. The argument that he didn’t oppose slavery because of how people would react is a really bad argument. Likewise, the idea that God, the ultimate source of morality, gave the okay to owning other humans as property, with a comprehensive list of rules about how to go about it, completely undermines the argument about Him being good.
How did you determine that God is the good one and Satan is the evil one?
@I Are Lebo, "They hated him for he spoke the truth".
@afro samurai2012, exactly my point. By their own stories, Jesus Christ pushed back against what was acceptable and received scorn and hatred for it. Him being against adulterous behaviour made him a lot of enemies, as did his preaching for pacifism. Going a step further and advocating against slavery would not have changed much beyond him having a morally good stance on that issue.
Do they really need that many police?
@ThePandaPool , probably, unfortunately. For as many people are protesting, there's probably 50 people in the country try that would go over and attack them. I don't condone their message, but I respect their right to speech.
I feel like there are other things the Bible says not to do that people could be protesting; like usury, or something.
@Link Silverblade, well let's be intellectually honest here, people would still be upset for them doing that as well.
Overall from a Christian perspective marriage is high up the list because biblically, a man marriage to his wife symbolizes gods relationship to the church. Making a mockery of one makes a mockery of the other.
And while unwed mothers, and people cohabiting aka common law but not married is also a sin. When disagreeing with that, those people aren't calling others some phobe, or pushing for that opinion to be criminalized as hate speach and all that.
So dig deeper and see the issues beyond the immediate topic, then you would see why this issue is higher up the list.
@phalcon , the very same chapter that forbids homosexuality also forbids wearing mixed fabrics, and with similar emphasis on importance.
@I Are Lebo, yes but do you know why mixed fabrics were forbidden? It's because the high priest wore mixed fabric, and that that was a unique dress for them.
But since the new testament times we don't have any more priests so that rule is meaningless now... however not so about homosexuality.
But again thanks for demonstrating your compleate ignorance about theology.
You know in logic this is know as a strawman logical fallacy.
That is to say you construct a strawman that represent the ideas you think the other side has, but you falsely represent their actual idea so they are easier to attack than their real points.
It's why when soldiers first train they fight against targets that dontvattack them back... strawman...
@phalcon , my point was not a straw man. My point was that people cherry pick which parts of the bible to pay attention to. Don’t like that one (in spite of there being no reference to priestly garb in that passage whatsoever)? Fine. The same chapter that says both of those things also forbids the consumption of shellfish. So if you eat lobster while taking the stance that homosexuality is wrong, you’re a hypocrite.
There are TONS of passages in the Bible that are immoral that good Christians today must discount just to keep themselves out of prison.
You argue very dishonestly.
@I Are Lebo, I'm really not trying to be aggressive or anything, but you're taking certain historical precedents and not others. The priestly garb thing doesnt come directly from the scriptures, it's from other records and things from that time. Granted, I have no idea which ones, because I'm not a scholar, but I'd just as easily assume shellfish consumption to be due to the fact that it was very easy for it to be contaminated and could make people sick. That's just my hot take.
@Pyvin, and my hot take is that you’re talking nonsense, given the fact that you’ve provided zero sources for your claim, whereas I’m providing the actual biblical references.
Deuteronomy 22, Leviticus 19. Like I said, the very same chapter that condemns homosexuality, something many Christians still bring up today, also condemns the wearing of mixed fabrics. If the priests wore mixed fabrics, then they weren’t following their own bible.
That’s my entire point. No one takes their unruly son to the edge of town and stones then to death because they understand it’s immoral. The hatred for gays is every bit as immoral.
@I Are Lebo, I claimed I wasnt a scholar. I'm not debating here, just giving my opinion. You're allowed to refute it, as you have. In the end, it's all good bro. You keep hating organized religion, I'll keep hating gays. 😘
PS. I'm actually very live and let live, I don't actually hate the LGBT peeps.
@Pyvin, that’s good. I try really hard to live by the motto “I don’t have to agree with you to respect you”.
So I apologize if I’ve come across as hateful. I despise organized religion, but I do not hate religious people. Most of them are just trying to be good people, and even if I disagree about the methods, the intentions matter.