Ok but regardless of the intent of the church, in most cases people will pick and choose what to preach and how they preach. Whether its changed from you get the death penalty for being gay to now you just don't go to heaven, people of ignorance choose bits and peices and they take the scriptures literally.
There are two types of religious people. One that will take the lessons of the church and let them be a reminder on how to be a better person, and another that will take some teachings and scriptures and use them as excuses for being hateful, or bigots. From what I have read on Robertson so far dating back about 3 years he is type B.
- sbroads24

YARP.

he's an idiot. i'm glad a&e is doing whats right. if they go back on their decision they are spineless.

no one should be allowed to preach bigotry. freedom of speech is a poopty (frank)ing excuse.

YARP.

he's an idiot. i'm glad a&e is doing whats right. if they go back on their decision they are spineless.

no one should be allowed to preach bigotry. freedom of speech is a poopty (frank)ing excuse.
- Putzfrau

I just hate people like Robertson that are so sure they have all of the answers. Just pure ignorance.

Ok but regardless of the intent of the church, in most cases people will pick and choose what to preach and how they preach. Whether its changed from you get the death penalty for being gay to now you just don't go to heaven, people of ignorance choose bits and peices and they take the scriptures literally.
There are two types of religious people. One that will take the lessons of the church and let them be a reminder on how to be a better person, and another that will take some teachings and scriptures and use them as excuses for being hateful, or bigots. From what I have read on Robertson so far dating back about 3 years he is type B.
- sbroads24

Right, but to say the belief that homosexuality is wrong is a matter of "picking and choosing" on the basis of the Bible is just flat out incorrect. You will be hard pressed to find any scholar (and by scholar I mean person who dedicates his life and/or career to studying it) that will tell you otherwise. And holding that belief in of itself isn't bigotry any more than acknowledging that my brother, an alcoholic who refuses to get help, has a serious problem (example only, I don't really have one) can be equated as hatred of him. You can easily say that someone is in the wrong without being prejudiced against him. We do it all the time in this society, and often rightfully so.

I just hate people like Robertson that are so sure they have all of the answers. Just pure ignorance.
- sbroads24

anyone that still takes a book written two thousand years ago as undisputed fact is an idiot.

there are a plethora of great lessons in the bible. there is also tons and tons of poop. why some people choose to believe in some of the poop and leave other poop behind just baffles me.

shellfish. can't eat that according to the bible. clothing with more than one fabric. YEP CAN'T WEAR THAT. pre marital sex. masturbation.

yeah i'm sure no one does any of that poop.

Right, but to say the belief that homosexuality is wrong is a matter of "picking and choosing" on the basis of the Bible is just flat out incorrect. You will be hard pressed to find any scholar (and by scholar I mean person who dedicates his life and/or career to studying it) that will tell you otherwise. And holding that belief in of itself isn't bigotry any more than acknowledging that my brother, an alcoholic who refuses to get help, has a serious problem (example only, I don't really have one) can be equated as hatred of him. You can easily say that someone is in the wrong without being prejudiced against him. We do it all the time in this society, and often rightfully so.
- buffalofan19

no.. thats exactly what it is. because if you're going to follow the bible to its word, then you should do so.

there are PLENTY of things that the bible "forbids" that no one gives a poop about. yet for some reason homosexuality is the one thing that everyone rallies behind?

people are picking one thing, the opinion on homosexuality, and holding it as indisputable fact, while willfully ignoring other sections of the bible that forbid things that are simply inconvenient for people to abid by.

what makes the line about homosexuality more important than the line about what clothing you can wear? or how much hair can be on your face?

no one cares about that poop. thus they are picking and choosing which passages of the bible are important.

they are not following the word of god. mankind is hand picking passages to fit into whatever they want to rationalize.

homosexuality makes you uncomfortable so you rationalize your hatred for it by pointing to an insignificant passage in the old testament.

treating the word of god so poorly is intensely blasphemous. phil is just as much of a sinner as the homosexuals he despises.

anyone that still takes a book written two thousand years ago as undisputed fact is an idiot.

there are a plethora of great lessons in the bible. there is also tons and tons of poop. why some people choose to believe in some of the poop and leave other poop behind just baffles me.

shellfish. can't eat that according to the bible. clothing with more than one fabric. YEP CAN'T WEAR THAT. pre marital sex. masturbation.

yeah i'm sure no one does any of that poop.
- Putzfrau

See, this is incorrect. The Bible says that Israelites could not eat shellfish. That was their law. It was basically treated like marijuana or cocaine is treated here today. Those were the laws of a single nation more than they were the laws of morality. And many people of that race still adhere to those many of rules today, btw. We don't here because we're not of that culture.

See, this is incorrect. The Bible says that Israelites could not eat shellfish. That was their law. It was basically treated like marijuana or cocaine is treated here today. Those were the laws of a single nation more than they were the laws of morality. And many people of that race still adhere to those many of rules today, btw. We don't here because we're not of that culture.
- buffalofan19

and everything else i mentioned?

you pointed out literally one thing and explained why that was not the case.

nothing else i listed is excused by your example.

sooo?

Right, but to say the belief that homosexuality is wrong is a matter of "picking and choosing" on the basis of the Bible is just flat out incorrect. You will be hard pressed to find any scholar (and by scholar I mean person who dedicates his life and/or career to studying it) that will tell you otherwise. And holding that belief in of itself isn't bigotry any more than acknowledging that my brother, an alcoholic who refuses to get help, has a serious problem (example only, I don't really have one) can be equated as hatred of him. You can easily say that someone is in the wrong without being prejudiced against him. We do it all the time in this society, and often rightfully so.
- buffalofan19

Ok but why is it always the hateful parts of the bible that are convieniently used as absolute truths?
There are never rants about slavery anymore, which the bible is pro slavery. The bible is also against women's rights. There aren't any religious rants about women's rights. Some people seems to grasp at the few things they can hate or that make them feel uncomfortable and use the bible as a crutch.

Ok but why is it always the hateful parts of the bible that are convieniently used as absolute truths?
There are never rants about slavery anymore, which the bible is pro slavery. The bible is also against women's rights. There aren't any religious rants about women's rights. Some people seems to grasp at the few things they can hate or that make them feel uncomfortable and use the bible as a crutch.
- sbroads24

because it has nothing to do with the bible. it has nothing to do with religion.

its a convenient way for people to rationalize their hatred of something different.

and everything else i mentioned?

you pointed out literally one thing and explained why that was not the case.

nothing else i listed is excused by your example.

sooo?
- Putzfrau

Some things that the bible will allow you to hate is still mildly accepted such as homophobia. I would love to hear Robertsons stance on women's rights and slavery and see if they match the views of Jesus Christ

no.. thats exactly what it is. because if you're going to follow the bible to its word, then you should do so.

there are PLENTY of things that the bible "forbids" that no one gives a poop about. yet for some reason homosexuality is the one thing that everyone rallies behind?

people are picking one thing, the opinion on homosexuality, and holding it as indisputable fact, while willfully ignoring other sections of the bible that forbid things that are simply inconvenient for people to abid by.

what makes the line about homosexuality more important than the line about what clothing you can wear? or how much hair can be on your face?

no one cares about that poop. thus they are picking and choosing which passages of the bible are important.

they are not following the word of god. mankind is hand picking passages to fit into whatever they want to rationalize.

homosexuality makes you uncomfortable so you rationalize your hatred for it by pointing to an insignificant passage in the old testament.

treating the word of god so poorly is intensely blasphemous. phil is just as much of a sinner as the homosexuals he despises.
- Putzfrau

Homosexuality is the thing that everyone "rallies" behind today because it's the hot-button issue of the day. It's getting the most play in the media. It's getting the most attention. In the 70's, when Roe vs. Wade came about, it was the 5th Commandment. In the 2020's, it will probably be some other issue. Society has been at odds with the Christian faith for some time, and will continue to attack bits and pieces today. It's the inevitability that comes with a secular society.

Homosexuality is the thing that everyone "rallies" behind today because it's the hot-button issue of the day. It's getting the most play in the media. It's getting the most attention. In the 70's, when Roe vs. Wade came about, it was the 5th Commandment. In the 2020's, it will probably be some other issue. Society has been at odds with the Christian faith for some time, and will continue to attack bits and pieces today. It's the inevitability that comes with a secular society.
- buffalofan19

you have yet to explain how these people are not "picking and choosing" passages of the bible.

Homosexuality is the thing that everyone "rallies" behind today because it's the hot-button issue of the day. It's getting the most play in the media. It's getting the most attention. In the 70's, when Roe vs. Wade came about, it was the 5th Commandment. In the 2020's, it will probably be some other issue. Society has been at odds with the Christian faith for some time, and will continue to attack bits and pieces today. It's the inevitability that comes with a secular society.
- buffalofan19

It's actually the Christian faith that has been at odds with society, and the advancement if society. The Catholic Church is so far behind modern society it's disturbing.
Trust me, in 50-100 years there will be gay priests. Oh wait there already are......

anyone that still takes a book written two thousand years ago as undisputed fact is an idiot.

there are a plethora of great lessons in the bible. there is also tons and tons of poop. why some people choose to believe in some of the poop and leave other poop behind just baffles me.

shellfish. can't eat that according to the bible. clothing with more than one fabric. YEP CAN'T WEAR THAT. pre marital sex. masturbation.

yeah i'm sure no one does any of that poop.
- Putzfrau

Whatever. Next you will be telling me that the earth is not flat.

I am just glad that I have given up my life to the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Whatever. Next you will be telling me that the earth is not flat.

I am just glad that I have given up my life to the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
- rmiethaner

and everything else i mentioned?

you pointed out literally one thing and explained why that was not the case.

nothing else i listed is excused by your example.

sooo?
- Putzfrau

I quoted you before you went back and edited your post. The matters of faith and morals that Christians hold, including the stance of homosexuality, aren't just in the Old Testament. They carried over to the New Testament. The Old Testament was based on the ideal that only one nation, one race were going to be saved. Hence, the term "God's Chosen People" was used a lot. "Nation" is the key word here. It was an single race of people. It was a single government. Those laws of what to eat or what not to eat, what to wear or not to wear, or what to do when you caught someone breaking one of the Ten Commandments, etc. did not have to do with morality. That was simply the law of the land, the authority of which was really no different than the laws and punishments we hold today. After Christ's death, and the Apostles established the Church, the focus became not on one nation, but to convert all nations. It was no longer a government institution. Hence, those rules did not carry over. Pretty much everything you said that people "ignore" are thrown out because the New Testament essentially tells you to throw them out. Certain laws of morality, however, did carry over (including that of homosexuality). The position is a lot more well founded than the media will have you believe.

Whatever. Next you will be telling me that the earth is not flat.

I am just glad that I have given up my life to Matt Ellis.
- rmiethaner

fixed

I quoted you before you went back and edited your post. The matters of faith and morals that Christians hold, including the stance of homosexuality, aren't just in the Old Testament. They carried over to the New Testament. The Old Testament was based on the ideal that only one nation, one race were going to be saved. Hence, the term "God's Chosen People" was used a lot. "Nation" is the key word here. It was an single race of people. It was a single government. Those laws of what to eat or what not to eat, what to wear or not to wear, or what to do when you caught someone breaking one of the Ten Commandments, etc. did not have to do with morality. That was simply the law of the land, the authority of which was really no different than the laws and punishments we hold today. After Christ's death, and the Apostles established the Church, the focus became not on one nation, but to convert all nations. It was no longer a government institution. Hence, those rules did not carry over. Pretty much everything you said that people "ignore" are thrown out because the New Testament essentially tells you to throw them out. Certain laws of morality, however, did carry over (including that of homosexuality). The position is a lot more well founded than the media will have you believe.
- buffalofan19

so again, picking and choosing. how is that not picking and choosing?

Christianity uses the old testament. if they wanted to just use the new testament that would be different. but they dont.

if you can show me in the new testament where it says "ignore leviticus x-y but leave in that part about homosexuality" i'll be totally down to believe you.

regardless, there are plenty of "morality" stances that DID carry over that are STILL ignored. pre marital sex? masturbation? opinions on womens rights?

are these not in the new testament? if they aren't, i'd like a copy of whatever bible you've been reading because clearly i've been reading the wrong one.

why have you not responded directly to what i said? why do you not respond directly to the examples i state instead of giving me this vague reasoning behind the old testament that you've already gone over. i'm well aware of these facts, both because i've done some studying of the bible (english major in college) and because you've already stated it.

and i dont know why you keep referencing the media. this is not a media issue. i'm not "informed" on this topic because of the media. i'm not outraged because of the media.

edit: honestly i'm sorry if i sound heated. i could go through and edit what i said to sound more PG but i'll just leave it as is and add this. i dont mean to attack you personally!

I quoted you before you went back and edited your post. The matters of faith and morals that Christians hold, including the stance of homosexuality, aren't just in the Old Testament. They carried over to the New Testament. The Old Testament was based on the ideal that only one nation, one race were going to be saved. Hence, the term "God's Chosen People" was used a lot. "Nation" is the key word here. It was an single race of people. It was a single government. Those laws of what to eat or what not to eat, what to wear or not to wear, or what to do when you caught someone breaking one of the Ten Commandments, etc. did not have to do with morality. That was simply the law of the land, the authority of which was really no different than the laws and punishments we hold today. After Christ's death, and the Apostles established the Church, the focus became not on one nation, but to convert all nations. It was no longer a government institution. Hence, those rules did not carry over. Pretty much everything you said that people "ignore" are thrown out because the New Testament essentially tells you to throw them out. Certain laws of morality, however, did carry over (including that of homosexuality). The position is a lot more well founded than the media will have you believe.
- buffalofan19

That's still completely avoiding the issue. The issue is why is is some of the bible or the beliefs of the Christian church so black and white like Homosexuals and Murderers will not go to heaven, yet other topics like women's rights all of sudden not taken literally? That's picking and choosing. There really isn't any other way to dice it

That's still completely avoiding the issue. The issue is why is is some of the bible or the beliefs of the Christian church so black and white like Homosexuals and Murderers will not go to heaven, yet other topics like women's rights all of sudden not taken literally? That's picking and choosing. There really isn't any other way to dice it
- sbroads24

this is a much more concise way to say what i wanted.

sorry for getting a little passionate.

It's actually the Christian faith that has been at odds with society, and the advancement if society. The Catholic Church is so far behind modern society it's disturbing.
Trust me, in 50-100 years there will be gay priests. Oh wait there already are......
- sbroads24

And yet many of the scientific theories we hold today, such as the Big Bang Theory as just one example, were brought forth by Catholics. The problem in the "Christianity versus Science" debate, for instance, is the insistence that the two are mutually exclusive.


The Church is "behind" secular society because the two can't really coexist without being in opposition. It's fundamentally impossible. And we can argue about this all night, but their positions are more well thought out than most give them credit for. Just read Humanae Vitae, the dogma that addressed the hot-button issue of artificial contraception. Say what you will about it, but everything that it said would happen has happened if it became widespread.

What people need to realize about the Catholic Church is that it's a worldwide institution. We tend to look at it from an American point of view. It's never going to change its position simply because Americans, or even the West in general wants it to.

This is really irrelevant, though, mainly because the Robertsons aren't even Catholic anyway, as far as I know.

Yep, nothing changed here

Good night

That's still completely avoiding the issue. The issue is why is is some of the bible or the beliefs of the Christian church so black and white like Homosexuals and Murderers will not go to heaven, yet other topics like women's rights all of sudden not taken literally? That's picking and choosing. There really isn't any other way to dice it
- sbroads24

Where was the issue of women's rights addressed in the New Testament? It really isn't, other than "Wives, obey your husbands", which addresses more of a family dynamic than anything else. It's not taken literally because there's nothing to take literally.

There's also another element as well: Christ gave the Apostles the power to "bind and loose" in the Gospel. Essentially, he told them, "whatever you guys say, goes". Again, this is all irrelevant if you don't hold the Bible as an authority, but these beliefs aren't as inconsistent as people think.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz



are we good yet?

And yet many of the scientific theories we hold today, such as the Big Bang Theory as just one example, were brought forth by Catholics. The problem in the "Christianity versus Science" debate, for instance, is the insistence that the two are mutually exclusive.


The Church is "behind" secular society because the two can't really coexist without being in opposition. It's fundamentally impossible. And we can argue about this all night, but their positions are more well thought out than most give them credit for. Just read Humanae Vitae, the dogma that addressed the hot-button issue of artificial contraception. Say what you will about it, but everything that it said would happen has happened if it became widespread.

What people need to realize about the Catholic Church is that it's a worldwide institution. We tend to look at it from an American point of view. It's never going to change its position simply because Americans, or even the West in general wants it to.

This is really irrelevant, though, mainly because the Robertsons aren't even Catholic anyway, as far as I know.
- buffalofan19

Yes. The Science of Myth.