@Ozymandiaz Because "the evil globalists are cancelling our roots and traditions 😥"
Conveniently forgetting that we were doing great before they came, with deities that literally required orgies, wine and parties to be worshipped, and that had superpowers and storylines better than anything Marvel
@fernie2 Agreed! Just in the case of the bible there's very little about the "God" himself.
And that is specifically to control people.
What better means to insure control if there's very little about the deity to conflict with the belief in such. Just an all knowing, all caring, perfect deity that has no purpose in existing.
The believe justifies itself. The ultimate in sophistry. You believe because he exists. And that he is unknowable and his reasons are beyond us fits as well.
If you take all those listed, it means most of the population of the planet. Just the most innocent of us have idolized someone when we were teenagers. I think this is just covering all bases, and letting us know that no one is worthy of the Kingdom of God, but there is a “get out” card: Jesus. That’s for those who believe this, it doesn’t mean I do, I’m just explaining it from an intellectual standpoint.
Ezekiel 26:19 onwards. God prophesises that the Babylonian King, Nebuchadnezzar II, would ruin the city of Tyre. It says:
I will bring you to a horrible end and you will be no more. You will be sought, but you will never again be found, declares the Sovereign Lord.”
Except... it never happened. In fact, after a 13 year siege, Babylonian forces were never able to set foot in the City of Tyre, they could only reach mainland Ushu. People like to say "well, yeah, but Alexander the Great managed to take Tyre 100's years later", which is true, but that raises two issues: 1) Ezekiel 26:7 specifically states it would be Nebuchadnezzar and his forces who raise Tyre, and 2) Tyre wasn't destroyed, but was in fact restored by the Romans not long after. Tyre grew in size (both in populace and actual land mass due to sediment build-up) and became wealthy again under Roman rule (thus, not meeting a "horrible end").
Tyre is still a city today - it is considered to be one of the oldest continually inhabited cities in the world. How does that square with God's prophecy? It doesn't. God, and by extension The Bible, were wrong.
I looked up several versions of Corinthians 6:9. those translations read "nor sexually immoral", not homosexual.
Ancient peoples did not have the modern concept of sexual orientation. Certain sexual acts were considered immoral or prohibited.
Corinthians was Paul's epistle to the Christians in Corinth. He was criticizing them for immoral practices. He was mad at the Corinthians because he felt they were rude and disrespectful to him when he visited them.
@badminton Yes, much depends upon translation and context. St Paul obviously had no idea that he was writing words that a developing Church would eventually declare "holy/sacred/inspired/infallible". He actually believed that "the end" was imminent ("we who are alive at His coming" as he also wrote - but the end did not come)
SW-User
@badminton Yes, it seems rather dishonest to translate "arsenokoitai" as "homosexuals" in the modern sense of sexual orientation, when no such concept existed in the ancient world. Paul was likely condemning a number of Ancient Greek sexual practices, including pederasty (why single out homosexuals rather than pederasts?) which was a normal part of Greek society at the time.
Bible is also anti-capitalist, but its fanbase (especially the politically active part) quite conveniently doesn't really seem to care much about that.
In virtue of it, I think you can simply choose to ignore the parts where its homophobic as well, and go on with your day.
Or, if you choose to quit that stuff and return it to the library, make sure to put it back into the Fantasy section 🧙♂️😏
Personally I see the Bible as the work of human beings. The only "revelation" I acknowledge is our Cosmos, any part of which can potentially reveal insights into its "meaning". Giving pre-eminence to anything at all, and insisting upon it, will bring with it the dangers all too apparent in the history of religion.
Having said that, there is the simplistic Biblical literalism of the Protestant fundamentalist and there is the more nuanced understanding of "inspiration" found in the Catholic Church, as expressed in Vatican II:-
However, since God speaks in Sacred Scripture through men in human fashion, the interpreter of Sacred Scripture, in order to see clearly what God wanted to communicate to us, should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words.
To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another.
But, since Holy Scripture must be read and interpreted in the sacred spirit in which it was written, no less serious attention must be given to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture if the meaning of the sacred texts is to be correctly worked out. The living tradition of the whole Church must be taken into account along with the harmony which exists between elements of the faith. It is the task of exegetes to work according to these rules toward a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture, so that through preparatory study the judgment of the Church may mature. For all of what has been said about the way of interpreting Scripture is subject finally to the judgment of the Church, which carries out the divine commission and ministry of guarding and interpreting the word of God.
This, to me, looks more of an attempt to criticize the Bible. Why single out homosexuality? What did Jesus say to the crowd, when a woman was caught in adultery? He said, "You who have no sin, cast the first stone." None could do it. They were just as guilty of sin.
God doesn't categorize sin. Humans do. Sin is sin, to God. All sin separates us from God, regardless of what it is. That's the point. God hates sin, because it keeps us separated from Him, until it is confessed and repented of. He hates sin, but loves the people, themselves. God loves all people the same. And we're all in need of salvation, not just some. John 3:16-17
@LadyGrace you're almost 80 and still brainwashed. That ridiculous book, written by and for males...to control everyone is SO anti-woman and free thinking...and you are still asleep
@fernie2 My belief is the Bible was written by humans and contains the values of the society at the time it was written...favoring men for sure. I do not say this to deny anyone their beliefs in God or spirituality or whatever. i would go further to believe that much of organized religion is the same--created by humans mostly men, to reflect their values, to control people, to offer solace to some...I consider myself a very spiritual person, but not in an organized institutional or scripted way. I was actually a strong church-goer considering being a minister, but too many humans frailties got in the way...too many who wanted to use religion for their own selfish needs...my religion is one of love, love for all others and all creatures and nature...with no artificial structures necessary.
Yeah but there's no context to this. Leviticus was written to provide rules and guidelines for the Isrealites after they were delivered from slavery. This was probably included to ensure that the people continue to reproduce and grow the nation. As far as Paul's letter to the Corinthians, he was focused on the people living as an example of Christians to other religions. (Corinth was full of other cults and relgions at the time) He isn't necessarily saying if someone is gay they won't go to heaven. He is saying for these things not to take over your whole life and become your main identity. For instance if a group of Christians went around stealing all the time Christianity would be labelled as a religion of theives.
@1pebbles You're like so close to the point yet still missing it. Christianity is supposed to include everyone. So if they got labelled as any one thing it would deter a lot of people from it altogether.
No the bible was re-written and changed by people & groups that want to enforce their own personal view. It's been translated back and forth between various languages - old and new variations over centuries
Leviticus 18:22 was believed when translated to mean incest between men, Because as we know, male/female incest happens in the Old Testemant so it's OK with that
The actual translation of Corinthians is based on misinterpretation of two old Hebrew words which is believed to refer to people with weak morals (first English translation said weaklings not homosexuals) and also the violation of young boys.
Funny how some of those that "follow" the Bible will march and protest against homosexuality..but not so much adulterers, thieves, the greedy or drunks. It's almost as if they are bigoted or something 🤔
This is also the book that says the world was created in six days, a snake talked a woman into eating some fruit, and that a pair of all the animals in the world fit on a boat smaller than the Titanic, which floated around for nearly a year after the world was flooded (by the way, where did all that water go..?)
@KlonB You really do have to stop being so jealous of me, why don't you just come out of your closet? More often than not, the most rabid homophobes like you turn out to be as gay as it gets 🤪
Actually the New Testament is not against homosexuality. It simply says that if you want to be a Christian and enter the Kingdom of Heaven you must give up your homosexual practices. If you are not a Christian and you don't want to enter the Kingdom then do as you please to your own detriment.
I look at homosexuality like the other things the Bible says. I wouldn't steal anyway....and I wouldn't kill anyway....and I don't worship any idols anyway....and I'm not homosexual. So I don't find anything to argue with the Bible about.
Most religions allow sex only within a marriage between a man and a women. So even sex between 2 single heterosexuals is a sin. Gay people shouldn't feel specially targeted.
So, according to Leviticus, doggy’s style is okay. And, I hate to break it to followers of the book that includes Corinthians, nobody is inheriting the mythical kingdom of god.
It supports fratricide, genocide, polygamy, sacrifices, incest, slavery, ecological devastation ( pillars of fire), and a host of other unsavory activities. Hardly a worthy guide for human morality.
