Obama..... not religious?

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

If something as unambiguous as “homosexual conduct is an abomination” or “slavery is moral”...can be disregarded...disregard the entire thing. You do not need the Bible to tell you not to kill or steal or lie.

Well, that's one opinion, and it's yours. But that's about as far as this claim goes. There are many who look at it the same way, and many who don't.

The alternate opinion that, no - just because some things in it are not right, you don't have to disregard the whole entire thing - is any less valid, or necessarily "hypocritical". If, like millions of liberal Christians today, you don't regard the Bible as a literal one-on-one reflection of God's truths, but rather as a book that compiles the many wisdoms and occasional unwisdoms of those who tried to relay His and Jesus's words, sometimes contradictorily or incompletely, then there is nothing hypocritical about evaluating its separate elements separately.

1 Reply

@nimh,

nimh wrote:

I think it's not so much frothing as strutting...

Preening?

1 Reply

@nimh,

Quote:

Well, that's one opinion, and it's yours. But that's about as far as this claim goes. There are many who look at it the same way, and many who don't.

The alternate opinion that, no - just because some things in it are not right, you don't have to disregard the whole entire thing - is any less valid, or necessarily "hypocritical". If, like millions of liberal Christians today, you don't regard the Bible as a literal one-on-one reflection of God's truths, but rather as a book that compiles the many wisdoms and occasional unwisdoms of those who tried to relay His and Jesus's words, sometimes contradictorily or incompletely, then there is nothing hypocritical about evaluating its separate elements separately.

Whatever rationalizations you want to use, Nimh...so that you do not have to acknowledge that the book is absolutely useless as an indicator of anything divine.

And if you need ancient Hebrews to tell you murder, stealing, lying is wrong...you've got even bigger troubles than your post suggest.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Not frothing...not strutting...not preening...

...just mentioning a few uncomfortable things to people who have a hard time accepting the truth.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

...just mentioning a few uncomfortable things to people who have a hard time accepting the truth.

Let me know when you find Truth. I hear it's somewhere near Beauty.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Quote:

Let me know when you find Truth. I hear it's somewhere near Beauty.

The "truth" is what I have been offering...and what you have been mocking.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

The "truth" is what I have been offering...and what you have been mocking.

Dude, the only mocking I've done is of your over-inflated ego... and that is the truth.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

DrewDad...you are as full of **** as that jerkoff screen name of yours.

I've presented decent reasons for everything I said here. You wanna do name calling...we'll do some name calling. I guess it is only fair to stop the reasoning and logic...and work in an area you have some chance of understanding.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

you are as full of ****

Frank a piece o' what?

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

When everything else fails, reach for the ad hominems.

I'm not myself Christian, by the way, or in any way religious. But do go on making assumptions.

2 Replies

@nimh,

Lemme chime in there -- I'm a lifelong agnostic myself. I'm not, however, blanketly anti-religion.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank, you put people into pockets.
Not all who believe in the christian concept of god would argue with you on this - that the book is absolutely useless as an indicator of anything divine.
At least they would argue they'd see much of it awry, but explainable as a kind of purchase for their own concepts.

This is a windmill that moved, I think, Mr. Tilter.

1 Reply

@sozobe,

sozobe wrote:

Lemme chime in there -- I'm a lifelong agnostic myself. I'm not, however, blanketly anti-religion.

i believe in a creator. not the abrahamic god of the big three; but "a" creator all the same.

and while judeaism has largely kept itself to the temple community, christianity and islam have involved themselves in politics since their beginnings. and given the faithful war, death, destruction and torture in return for their devotion. the very things that the framers sought to avoid; making the concept of the united states a secular one. some don't seem to understand that the constitution trumps the nattering of plymouth rock. some understand it, but don't like it and seek to rewrite history.

so while i'm not agnostic about a greater being (or whatever), i'm certainly atheistic about religion.

here's the real truth about god; we have absolutely no true knowledge what the truth is.

lot's of speculation and manipulation, but no true knowledge.

1 Reply

@JPB,

JPB wrote:

The christian who believes that the Word of Jesus is the Word of God can easily make the case that Leviticus no longer applies.

Sorry -- I don't see how any of the New-Testament quotes you cite translate into "God is now cool with homosexuality, cool wish shellfish, and no longer cool with slavery. These are moral doctrines that liberal Christians made up by themselves, in defiance of the Bible. I applaud them for that -- don't get me wrong -- but I just don't understand their denial of the fact that this is what they were doing.

2 Replies

@JPB,

JPB wrote:

I called it a fundamentalist perspective which is one of three christian perspectives that include fundamentalism, conservatism, and liberal theology.

Sounds like guilt by association to me. Since when is it fundamentalist to insist that a text means what it says-- whether you like the meaning or not?

0 Replies

@nimh,

nimh wrote:

To some extent you fell into the same trap, when you said, "Christians don't have to hate gays, and indeed there are many who don't. It's God who hates gays." That would only be true if you take the Bible for the direct expression of God's truths, rather than a book written by disciples, gathered together much time after the fact, which contains many of God's truth but is certainly not flawless.

Nonsense. I don't take the Bible for the direct expression of God's truths, because I don't think there is a god whose truths or lies the Bible could express. When I say "God hates gays", I am telling the plain and simple truth in the exactly the same way as if I was saying "Athena admires Odysseus", or "Romeo and Juliet are in love with each other", or "Ebenezer Scrooge is a miser". Each of these statements is a truth, an objective truth, about a character in a book. No more, no less.

Quote:

Lemme chime in there -- I'm a lifelong agnostic myself. I'm not, however, blanketly anti-religion.

Then I guess you and I can't be friends anymore. Tough.

3 Replies

@DontTreadOnMe,

You got a book?

0 Replies

@Thomas,

I should have thought these questions had been adequately addressed in "The Hermeneutics of Nancy and Sluggo".

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Quote:
Lemme chime in there -- I'm a lifelong agnostic myself. I'm not, however, blanketly anti-religion.

Then I guess you and I can't be friends anymore. Tough.

Bummer.

There seems to be an element of the convert here -- the ex-smoker who's way more anti-smoking than anyone else, the deaf person who was raised in a hearing environment and is way more militantly Deaf than the deaf person who was raised in a Deaf environment...

I just don't see religion as inherently evil. I was never religious but I've had many good friends who are, have gone to various churches and temples, etc. Several of these communities were really wonderful for the participants, really a force for good in their lives. I get it. Not for me, but I get it.

2 Replies

@nimh,

**** you, Nimh. DrewDad started the bullshit. I responded.

0 Replies

Obama..... not religious?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know