Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 131

Thread: Religions of HATE!

  1. #41
    Revenge of the Organic
    Thelost1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Warshington
    Last Seen
    09-17-09 @ 08:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    1,189

    Re: Religions of HATE!

    Quote Originally Posted by TheHarshTruth View Post
    moderator, I have no problems with being called whatever. If somebody wants to call me something I'm all for it.

    I don't have much respect for oxford or most of the ivy leagues. Stanford is the only decent school in the bunch and I do respect it. Greatly. It's by far the best university in the world. Not oxford. Oxford can and should stay in that little inbred country full of people who can't speak english right.
    [insulting]

    You, dear sir, are pathetic. You have made no actual argument to support your claims, overriding the prevailing attitude with no more evidence than your word. To top it off, you insult the British, forgetting the massive achievements (invention of computers, anyone?) that have originated in Britain.

    Are you a hysterical Stanford grad or something? Why do you suppose Stanford to be such a great school when condemning all of the others? Use logic, please.

    [/insulting]
    Emphasis added.

    "The religion of one age is the literary entertainment of the next."
    ~Emerson

  2. #42
    Steve
    tryreading's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Central Florida
    Last Seen
    02-26-13 @ 07:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    4,809

    Re: Religions of HATE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    The Christian Groups I know of believe in loving the sinner and hating the sin be it gay sex or adultery.....
    I get it. Don't hate the playuh, hate the gaaame.

  3. #43
    Sage
    jfuh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pacific Rim
    Last Seen
    01-20-12 @ 09:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    16,631

    Re: Religions of HATE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny_Utah View Post
    Why does it seem that any religion other than Christianity is able to publicly state Hate Speech and that their right to discuss their feelings is acceptable, since we don't want to suppress any people's "Religious Beliefs". But with Christians it is not acceptable. Are other religions more mysterious? What is the psychological thing that allows people to accept this double standard. If we saw thousands of christians in London marching and screaming Death to Islam...Death to Persians! There would be an outcry like you have never heard from our media, but we are shown media of them doing so all of the time, over cartoons, over just about anything.

    Is an open discussion even possible?

    Your thoughts?
    Uh... Buddhists?
    Christians that mar the religion with hate speech are unacceptable.
    I would expect that christians in their right mind hold themselves to a higher standard than to compare their faith with fanatical islamics to state how simply because Death to islam is not screamed is some how better?

  4. #44
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,891

    Re: Religions of HATE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Binary_Digit View Post
    The "previous covenant" isn't the OT law,
    But wasn't the point of quoting that passage to show me that the commandments of the OT no longer apply?

    Quote Originally Posted by Binary_Digit View Post
    it was a separate agreement between Abraham and God. Part of that deal was that Abraham's "seed" would be blessed, which, according to Paul, meant that Jesus would be a decendant of Abraham ("'And to your seed,' that is, Christ").

    That particular verse refers to a law that came 430 years after the covenant was made with Abraham, but the lesson seems to be "the law" was only a tutor until we were blessed with the spirit of Christ, then we no longer needed "the law." The rest of Galations talks about other old laws like circumcision in the same context:

    In chapter 4 it says that Hagar the bondwoman's enslaved children represent the covenant handed down to Moses from Mount Sinai (the 10 Commandments plus about 600 others), and the free woman's son represents Jesus ("through the promise"). And we are children of the free woman, not the bondwoman.
    Oh I get it, instead of defending your previous passage, you give me this obscure and blatantly ambiguous parable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Binary_Digit View Post
    There's a lot of metaphorical stuff to wade through, but the conclusion I get is that since Jesus was here, we should "cast out the bondwoman" and only practice laws that coincide with the spirit and teachings of Jesus.
    Alright, I'll humor you. New Testament it is then:

    Luke 19:27 "But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them in my presence."

    Please explain the metaphor Christ was trying to get across in this parable. Please read the preceding lines so that you do not accuse me of taking an absurd line out of context. Its an interesting story about how a rich noble rewards and punishes those who invest wisely with what he has given them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Binary_Digit View Post
    Also just so you know, I don't necessarily believe everything in the Bible. I have serious doubts that any of it was inspired by God. I'm just familiar with how some Christians explain why they're allowed to eat pork and mix cotton and polyester in the same wardrobe.
    What? You don't think its the inspired word of god? Then why in god's name am I trying to get you to defend it as so.
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

  5. #45
    Guru
    Binary_Digit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 04:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,539

    Re: Religions of HATE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean
    But wasn't the point of quoting that passage to show me that the commandments of the OT no longer apply?
    Yes and that's exactly what I did. The law became a tutor, we no longer need a tutor now that Christ was here. It's a simple lesson.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean
    Oh I get it, instead of defending your previous passage, you give me this obscure and blatantly ambiguous parable.
    No, I defended the previous passage by clarifying to you what it means. You made assumptions about it that weren't true, and I so clarified what the message really is and gave you that obscure parable to further support the idea that the law was a tutor and we no longer need a tutor now that Christ was here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean
    Alright, I'll humor you. New Testament it is then:

    Luke 19:27 "But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them in my presence."

    Please explain the metaphor Christ was trying to get across in this parable. Please read the preceding lines so that you do not accuse me of taking an absurd line out of context. Its an interesting story about how a rich noble rewards and punishes those who invest wisely with what he has given them.
    That has nothing to do with the topic. Jesus also acknowleged that slavery was acceptable (in Ephesians, I think), what's that got to do with whether or not the OT laws still apply to us today? You're preaching to the saved if you intend to show me that the Bible isn't necessarily true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean
    What? You don't think its the inspired word of god? Then why in god's name am I trying to get you to defend it as so.
    Because you said there is nothing in the Bible that tells people they can forget about the old laws, and I wanted to show you that there actually is.
    Last edited by Binary_Digit; 02-16-07 at 10:50 AM.

  6. #46
    Banned Trajan Octavian Titus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    We can't stop here this is bat country!
    Last Seen
    03-05-08 @ 07:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    20,915

    Re: Religions of HATE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean View Post
    What?!?... Ahem

    [youtube]gubiP3mP3Ds[/youtube]

    And you know whats really nuts, I'm on her side. Within the context of her religious fundamentalist beliefs, everything she says is rational and can be supported by her scripture. Hannity's moderation, his taking the overall message of the new testament and ignoring the rest of his god's commandments, is theologically bankrupt.

    Either your bible is the infallible word of god, or it isn't.

    She considers the religious moderate types to be Christians in name only because they cherry pick the passages they agree with from the 1st century antiquated barbarism that Fundamentalists take literally.

    Its not as if somewhere in the Bible it says that Christians can jettison said savage passages once they come to the new world and are confronted with modern morality.
    lmfao, Phelps has a church consisting of his family members, they are not even representative of Christian fundamentalism let alone Christianity, and in all probablility they're a liberal plant. Furthermore; comparing a church of like 20 people to the millions upon millions of Islamic Fascists is apples an oranges.

  7. #47
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,891

    Re: Religions of HATE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Binary_Digit View Post
    That has nothing to do with the topic. Jesus also supported slavery, what's that got to do with whether or not the OT laws still apply to us today? You're preaching to the saved if you intend to show me that the Bible isn't necessarily true.
    It has everything to do with the topic. I don't need to show you that "the bible is the infallible word of god" is not true. You already said that you don't think it to be.

    I am "preaching to the saved" who cannot answer for its immoral passages, and its contradictions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Binary_Digit View Post
    Yes and that's exactly what I did. The law became a tutor, we no longer need a tutor now that Christ was here. It's a simple lesson.

    No, I defended the previous passage by clarifying to you what it means. You made assumptions about it that weren't true, and I so clarified what the message really is and gave you that obscure parable to further support the idea that the law was a tutor and we no longer need a tutor now that Christ was here.

    Because you said there is nothing in the Bible that tells people they can forget about the old laws, and I wanted to show you that there actually is.
    No, you showed me an obscure passage that MAY be interpreted to say that the agreement between Abraham and God could be forgotten. You keep shifting the focus of your statement from the old testament.

    Again I ask you, where can I find that the commandments, and what was considered to be an abomination by god, that we find in the OT, are no longer applicable since Christ's ministry.

    And also, can you answer for the inconsistencies in god's morality? I don't buy this "the old laws were a tutor" nonsense. Why would a perfect god allow for such immoral tutoring? Wouldn't he have gotten it right the 1st time?
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

  8. #48
    Banned Trajan Octavian Titus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    We can't stop here this is bat country!
    Last Seen
    03-05-08 @ 07:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    20,915

    Re: Religions of HATE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean View Post

    Again I ask you, where can I find that the commandments, and what was considered to be an abomination by god, that we find in the OT, are no longer applicable since Christ's ministry.
    "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

  9. #49
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,891

    Re: Religions of HATE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Trajan Octavian Titus View Post
    lmfao, Phelps has a church consisting of his family members, they are not even representative of Christian fundamentalism let alone Christianity, and in all probablility they're a liberal plant. Furthermore; comparing a church of like 20 people to the millions upon millions of Islamic Fascists is apples an oranges.
    Yes! ToT! A real debate!

    Okay, first of all I didn't compare them to Islamic Fascists, I merely said that their beliefs can be supported by biblical scripture. Just like Saint Augustine's arguments for the torture of heretics (which laid the foundation for the Inquisition.)

    My contempt is for dangerous dogma, which consists of ANY religious fundamentalism.

    Second of all, as for her being a liberal plant. She isnt, she's the wife of the nutjob famous for "God Hates Fags".com

    Quote Originally Posted by Trajan Octavian Titus View Post
    "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
    Not quite an answer to my challenge ToT. The passage you quoted would suggest that it would be just for Christ to fulfill the barbaric morality of the OT because he himself is free of sin.

    This is a falsification of morality, and doesn't answer for how it was considered just to god for the people of antiquity to stone adulterers and heretics.
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

  10. #50
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Religions of HATE!

    Quote Originally Posted by 26 X World Champs View Post
    Yeah right....two words for you Navy Pride...BILL CLINTON...tell us all how you love the sinner....
    I am telling you what the Catholoc Church teaches my left wing friend...Sadly I am imperfect and not without sin and I don't hate Clinton but I think he is a scumbag........
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •