|
God hates fags... (pg. 15)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Alex
Hmm, so there IS a specific passage.
It's been a while since I've read it, but if I remember correctly most of the worst sins comitted have their own story in the bible, or multiple stories.
Are there any specific stories or passages concerning god killing gay men for having gay sex? (Not genesis, the sodomites got nuked but they were rapists). |
Correct, the Sodomites got wacked for being rapists, not gay... of course the fact that they were homosexuals probably didn't help their cause but then again that was well before Leviticus so who know's maybe Sodom was the problem that necesitated the rule... kind of like how the city of Calgary has a bi-law against sexually molesting squirels in parks... there had to be a problem before someone would write a law. |
|
|
| inconspicuous |
| if there is a god, I'm sure he hates people who picket funerals more than anyone else. |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by nchs09
2 million dollars for emotional distress? Stupid country with these stupid lawsuits. |
i think alot of americans file frivolous law suits and win way too much money. This case, however, is exactly the reason for punitive damages. These people are purposefully trying to cause emotional harm to the families of dead soldiers. that is one of the most heartless acts. i do believe, however, that the amount will be reduced on appeal. these huge victories are usually reduced on appeal. |
|
|
| tubularbills |
:wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:
:stongue: |
|
|
| david.michael |
| It's pretty much the greatest thing I've ever seen. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Alex
Is there a passage to back that up?
Or did you just pull that out of your ass? |
| quote: | Originally posted by Alex
Hmm, so there IS a specific passage. |
yeah, so how you like those apples? as if i make mistakes like that little boy.
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Hmm, I don't think it was a bad choice at all. The Abrahamic religious family is all about faith. Yaweh seems pretty clear that he wants people to choose to love him. Making a choice to love God requires that God's existance be in question... a matter of faith. If the existance of God were certain, a proven fact, then one would have no choice but to love God. Yaweh is all about giving us choices, not taking them away (thus the whole free will thing). |
yeah, that's a wonderful answer and all, but i dont buy it for a second.
The main problem being (as we have discussed) that how can god expect to generate "faith" in peoples thousands of years after jesus died for our sins, if the only record we have is full of ambiguous and contradictory bull? If god was after our (blind) faith in the first place, why send his only begotten son (complete with magic powers no less) at all? It was ok to display definitive proof then but not now? Even though (imo) the world is in much more need of faith now than it ever was back then. Hell, some parts of the world had to wait more than 1000 years for god's message to reach them.
The bible is littered with examples of an interventionist god, and now nothing? How is that consistent? (I would argue god would be consistent in all things). I presume we're not including, say, the branch davidians as the new israelites? And whilst I like the concept of the bahai I still think they're full of too.
So, what is the holy trinity doing now? Biding their time? |
|
|
| Alex |
The old testament wants blind faith, yes, but have you bothered to read the new testament or have you just cleverly googled "dumb bible passages" and "why the bible sucks, lol"?
And don't call me a little boy, or I'll go all Samson on your ass. :stongue: :p |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Alex
but have you bothered to read the new testament |
bits and pieces through the years. but i dont feel like wasting time eating dog just so i know how bad it tastes.
| quote: | Originally posted by Alex
or have you just cleverly googled "dumb bible passages" and "why the bible sucks, lol"? |
no, i just know things.
| quote: | Originally posted by Alex
And don't call me a little boy, or I'll go all Samson on your ass. :stongue: :p |
what, and marry some bitch that steals your power? :conf: |
|
|
| Jake Benson |
| quote: | Originally posted by Alex
And don't call me a little boy, or I'll go all Samson on your ass. :stongue: :p |
Samsung sucks. My Samsung phone won't T9 "Israel" but it will T9 "Palestine." Yeah I understand being pro one and anti the other, but that doesn't mean the WORD doesn't exist. Stupid Asians!
:whip: |
|
|
| Alex |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
bits and pieces through the years. but i dont feel like wasting time eating dog just so i know how bad it tastes.
no, i just know things.
what, and marry some bitch that steals your power? :conf: |
He still owned in the end :p |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
yeah, that's a wonderful answer and all, but i dont buy it for a second. |
Yeah, I kind of figured you wouldn't, but then when do you ever accept anything I say without at least one challenge ;)
| quote: | | The main problem being (as we have discussed) that how can god expect to generate "faith" in peoples thousands of years after jesus died for our sins, if the only record we have is full of ambiguous and contradictory bull? If god was after our (blind) faith in the first place, why send his only begotten son (complete with magic powers no less) at all? It was ok to display definitive proof then but not now? Even though (imo) the world is in much more need of faith now than it ever was back then. Hell, some parts of the world had to wait more than 1000 years for god's message to reach them. |
God isn't after blind faith, he/it is after our love. In order to love something you must first accept that it exists, which is why revealation is necessary; however, as I stated earlier, giving full revealation (leaving no doubt) would result in people being compelled to love god rather then choosing. As far as why send Jesus to die for our sins... to gain a greater kinship with his people. Jesus, while referred to as the son of god is really part of god (for the sake of this argument you must allow that God exists because none of this matters if you exclude that possibility... so presume the existance of god... just for a few minutes). God took human form so that he could experience first hand the life of a human (think Star Trek TNG where Picard got hit by that probe thing and was given the experience of living a life in a dead civilization). So, Jesus was/is the part of God that lived as man, to give to God full knowledge of what the life of man is. God didn't give Jesus up to death as a way of Jesus being punished on behalf of man for the collective sins of man, rather, by living as Jesus - by experiencing the draw of sin first hand - God was moved to forgive the sins of man.
[QUOTE]The bible is littered with examples of an interventionist god, and now nothing? How is that consistent? (I would argue god would be consistent in all things). QUOTE]
You know that I went on a very long journey to find my faith... this is the very question that prompted that journey. I'm afraid that after 18 years I don't have an answer that would satisfy you. This is not to say I don't have an answer. I fully believe that the holy spirit is at work in the world, not by direct intervention by by divine inspiration. I know that you're looking for the big miracles, the pillars of fire; however, the time of revealation is past. The work of god in the world in now the work of those moved by the holy spirit. Why has God stopped with the big shows? I can't say, I still haven't been able to reconsile that. |
|
|
|
|
