• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pope Tells Gay Man: ‘God Made You Like This and Loves You Like This’

Urethra Franklin said:
You miss the point. I'm not shocked.

:roll:
Click to expand...

No, you missed the point...anyone who reads the Bible would know this...you act as though you've made a new revelation...you have not...
 
Elvira said:
No, you missed the point...anyone who reads the Bible would know this...you act as though you've made a new revelation...you have not...
Click to expand...

No you missed the point, big style.

I do not act as though I have made a new revelation, because I haven't. I have referred to the analyses of historians such as Pucknett, who in fact wrote an amazingly insightful book on Mary Magdeleine.

I'm neither a theologian nor a historian, so I don't claim to make revelations. However, various analyses of the bible and its interpretations are there for us to examine and reflect upon as intellectual, thinking beings. We come to our own conclusions. My personal belief is that the bible is a loose historical account of certain happenings which are way open to interpretation. I don't doubt that Jesus Christ walked this earth as a historical figure, but he wasn't the only "messiah sent to save us" - he was the one that got the best publicity job. Improbable that he was the son of any saviour up above and a gynaecological impossiblilty that his mother was a virgin. Men wrote the bible and pushed its interpretation in their own way to make up the rules as they wanted the common folk to follow them - social control, nothing else.

Others may choose to believe the word of the bible hook line and sinker as the word of their saviour. While I respect your right to do so, I personally find it illogical, and resent any attempt to have "the word" translated into civil law or any secular institution that would force those beliefs onto others.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
No you missed the point, big style.

I do not act as though I have made a new revelation, because I haven't. I have referred to the analyses of historians such as Pucknett, who in fact wrote an amazingly insightful book on Mary Magdeleine.

I'm neither a theologian nor a historian, so I don't claim to make revelations. However, various analyses of the bible and its interpretations are there for us to examine and reflect upon as intellectual, thinking beings. We come to our own conclusions. My personal belief is that the bible is a loose historical account of certain happenings which are way open to interpretation. I don't doubt that Jesus Christ walked this earth as a historical figure, but he wasn't the only "messiah sent to save us" - he was the one that got the best publicity job. Improbable that he was the son of any saviour up above and a gynaecological impossiblilty that his mother was a virgin. Men wrote the bible and pushed its interpretation in their own way to make up the rules as they wanted the common folk to follow them - social control, nothing else.

Others may choose to believe the word of the bible hook line and sinker as the word of their saviour. While I respect your right to do so, I personally find it illogical, and resent any attempt to have "the word" translated into civil law or any secular institution that would force those beliefs onto others.
Click to expand...

Silly historians...shoulda read the Bible if they wanted to know thew truth, instead of makin' up stories about real people they know nothin' about...:2rofll:
 
Elvira said:
Silly historians...shoulda read the Bible if they wanted to know thew truth, instead of makin' up stories about real people they know nothin' about...:2rofll:
Click to expand...

Of course it's that simple isn't it? Enjoy life over there on planet Black and White. I'll stay in the real world thanks.
 
Vision said:
I believe I pointed out that, rather, the opposite is the true:

https://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-...-marriage-trans-rights-times-study-finds.html

According to the Times study, it is rather the minority of aging Boomers and dysfunctional millennial who will have to adapt to the real world, and accept that Gen Z is anti-gay, with "LGBT rights" being a dying relic which won't have any validity in the post-modern world they've inherited.

So no, it seems that unless the LGBT cult stops its stagnation, and renounces its own deviancy, it is it which will die off, both culturally, and evolutionarily as well, given its limited reproductive ability.

Whether or not it would be worth society's trouble to re-ban sodomite "marriage" or not, I'm unsure, but it wouldn't be difficult at all for society to effectively make publicly identifying as "LGBT" as unacceptable as publicly acceptable as identifying with ISIS - which if fortune may have it, they'll get at it posthaste
Click to expand...

Let's point out who 'the Times' are. They are the 'Catholic Times'. There seems to be a religious bias to that newspaper.
 
Vision said:
I fail to see how relaying dubious information is following Christ's example. At best, it's a mistake, at worst, a lie.

Though typically statements, whether about Christ, Buddha, Confucius, or other sages are typically made by less literate members of society who have likely never bothered to read either gospels, Sutras, or Analects to being with before chiming in.
Click to expand...

Christ was all about going to everyone and delivering the message and essentially being their friend. He hung out with the sinners and because he wasn't judgmental about them, they were more likely to listen. He didn't judge them even as he warned them about the consequences of their sins.

Now, we can have a separate argument about what is and isn't sins and translation issues and editing potentials. And we could even apply it to what his actions were as opposed to what we read today. But overall, everything I read on Jesus is his open love of all and his speaking on how the Father is the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom