 |
|
|
|
 A series of recent conferences have cast a light on gay Catholics and their families.
November 8th, 2011
12:22 PM ET
My Take: Why good Catholics are challenging church line on homosexuality
By Patrick Hornbeck , Special to CNN The Roman Catholic Church has long been a reliable source for one-dimensional storylines: Victims of sexual abuse call for justice. Parishes close as numbers of clergy plummet. Rosary-clad Catholics protest outside abortion clinics. Perhaps nowhere has the storyline seemed more clear-cut than with regard to the church’s treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people and their relationships. Official Catholic teachings describe gay or lesbian orientation as “an objective disorder” and tell those who love their same-sex partners that they possess a “tendency… toward an intrinsic moral evil.” Catholic bishops have been public advocates for laws banning same-sex marriage, and some have sought to prevent LGBT Catholics and their allies from fully participating in the Church’s rituals and activities But neither formal teachings nor bishops’ statements tell the whole story. A series of recent conferences at American colleges reveals the breadth of Catholic approaches to issues of sexual diversity. The conferences, part of an effort called More than a Monologue, have happened at two Catholic universities and two non-denominational divinity schools The events conclusively show that American Catholics are hardly of one mind, nor in lockstep with their bishops, when it comes to same-sex marriage; to rights for LGBT people at home, at work, and in church; or to the ongoing campaign against anti-gay bullying in schools. At Fordham University in New York, a Catholic school, a proud mother of a grown gay son drew a standing ovation when she told a story about discovering the effect of church teachings on her child. Here’s that mother, Deb Word, who has founded a group Fortunate Families to help Catholic families with lesbian daughters and gay sons, in her own words: Fast forward to a family vacation in the Gulf. There were five of us floating—Sean and his wife, Chris, and his dad and me, holding onto each other’s rafts. And I said, ‘I think this is what Heaven is like.’ And Christopher said quietly, “except I won’t be there with you.” “Son, where do you get this stuff?” “Mom, it’s your club. You know the rules.” And if my cradle Catholic child, growing up in a loving family, got this message, then what does Catholic mean in more conservative homes? … And I wonder, why do I stay in a club that my son says is dangerous to his soul?” Another panelist at the event described the freedom she feels as a result of living, within the church’s rules, as a celibate lesbian. A third, a physician in New York City, praised the Catholic tradition for its emphasis on human dignity and social justice, but added: “I am troubled by the fact that I find greater acceptance of myself as a whole person in my professional community as a physician, than I do in the official hierarchy of the church of my family, my childhood, and my life.” At the same time, he refused to let the church off the hook for the part he accuses it of playing in tacitly condoning the bullying of LGBT youth. Last month, at Yale University, a Catholic layman who teaches psychiatry spoke movingly of his attempt to offer church leaders the wisdom of his scientific field, and of his bitter disappointment when his offers were met with silence. And at Connecticut ’s Fairfield University, scholars, clergy, and lay Catholics recently discussed the implications for the church of having many gay and lesbian people, both in and out of the closet, in roles as priests and ministers. These public events have brought into the light the struggles, compromises and choices about meaning and love that many Catholics experience daily. Poll numbers show that while many of their bishops have been stepping up their rhetoric on the issue, only one-in-three American Catholics describe opposition to same-sex marriage as “very important.” Seventy percent support legal recognition for same-sex couples. All of us, Catholic or not, LGBT or not, owe it to ourselves and our fellow citizens to keep these new conversations going. Let’s not to settle for only part of the story. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Patrick Hornbeck. soundoff (2,880 Responses)« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next »
Next entry »CNN Belief Blog's a.m. speed read for Wednesday
« Previous entryMississippi amendment on 'personhood' divides Christians
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Editor's Note: Patrick Hornbeck is an assistant professor and associate chair for undergraduate studies at Fordham University.
It seems like WWJD and others are fond of posting irrelevant url's – but since this thread specifically is about being gay –
Many of you fundiots [fundamentalist idiots] claim that gay folks choose to be gay. Can you provide the citations to valid peer-reviewed scientific research that supports that contention?
"fundiots" that is the funniest damn thing i have ever seen... thank you for that – seriously! thats too good!
fundiots. How much mental effort did you expend crafting that dignified, charitable, humane term?
@ catholic engineer – I got tired of typing out fundamentalist idiot over and over. Funny thing – if some folks wouldn't be fundiots, I wouldn't have to waste time calling them fundiots.
The Bible is estimated to have been written between 1450 B.C. and 95 A.D.
Both man and woman possess the seed of life Genesis 3:15 (Discovered by man 17th Century)
There is a place void of stars in the North Job 26:7 (discovered by man 19th Century)
Earth is held in place by invisible forces Job 26:7 (discovered by man 1650)
Taxonomic classification of matter Genesis 1 (discovered by man 1735)
Man was the last animal created Genesis 1 (discovered by man 15th Century)
@Colin, Paul, Get Real, The good Doctor, and anyone I may have missed responding to WWJD
I think we made him short circut..... sort of like asking a robot to turn itself on, the information just does not compute and so now he's taken to posting false facts to himself to bring himself back to his reality.
Well done team!
Lightning and thunder are related Job 38:25 (discovered by man 19th Century)
Life originated in the sea Genesis 1 (Man discovered 19th Century)
No there isn't. You obviously need a better telescope.
Why do fundiots lie?
Water cycle Ecclesiastes 1:7 (Man discovered 17th Century)
Arcturus and other stars move through space Job 38:32 (Man discovered 19th Century)
Plants use sunlight to manufacture food Job 8:16 (Man discovered 1920)
So, we have dragons, a void in the star pattern, and invisible forces. you will excuse me if I don't change my opinion.
Matter is made up of invisible particles Romans 1:20 (Man discovered 20th Century)
He is copying and pasting from some fundie web site?
Light can be split up into component colors Job 38:24 (Man discovered 1650)
Absolute favorite part about WWJD little melt down here.
Apparently everything that he's citing the bible found before man wasn't "discovered" until the enlightenment. So basically when christianity was at its strongest and controlling most of the science around apparently "scientists" didn't do anything until they were allowed to do real science again. I guess WWJD's point is the israelites and "god" were really smart, then christianity came and there was about 17 centuries of stupidity.
Thanks WWJD for pointing out that the only idiots here are christians! You're a real help to us atheists!
You atheists don't want facts, you deny facts. All you want to do is hear yourself rattle about how you are smarter than God. you will never know the truth because you run from truth. It would spoil your sinful delusional fun. The fun won't last, there is coming a horrible penalty that goes along with those blinders you have on. For people who don't believe in God you sure do like to stay on a religion blog ALL THE TIME. Ever wonder why that is. You are trying to convince yourselves he doesn't exist. You need confirmation from others like you that there is no God cause your soul is crying out for him.
WWJD – I will respond to each claim, but it will be later.
Proverbs 14:7 is backed by Psalm 14:1 where the definition is aptly laid out.
WWJD is using the same lame sites HS uses....LMAO!
"Life originated in the sea Genesis 1 (Man discovered 19th Century)"
Ok wait you're trying to claim evolution within the bible when supposedly God made everything in 6 days. That's hilarious!
Any time we find "meaning" in a text, we arrive at that "meaning" by fitting it in with our previous knowledge. And this involves assumptions or presuppositions about such things as the nature of the text we are reading. LOL!
Holy crap, you guys broke WWJD.
WWJD – did you read the Bible references you cited? I ask, becuase I looked at the first one – Job 26:7,
"He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing."
You cite this for two propositions – the Bible authors being aware that “There is a place void of stars in the North” and the “Earth is held in place by invisible forces”
The first is flat wrong, and the passage from Job does not even say that. Second, it is clear that the author thinks the Earth is suspended. It isn't. I assume, based in the date you refer to, that you are alleging that the "invisible forces" is gravity. That is a huge stretch given that gravity is attractive and prevents suspension. Second, it is not even a force, it is a warping of space -time.
Why do we always hear a nervous chuckle and a sheepish laughter in these handles?
Don't grin much, lest that chuckle becomes a permanent fixture on that face.
"Plants use sunlight to manufacture food Job 8:16 (Man discovered 1920)"
You do know that farming started 10,000 years ago so I am sure man knew that plants needed sunlight to grow. It's amazing the stupidity of people. Oh look the bible invented farming.....who knew.... LOL!
@Dan
If I was nervously "nervously" chuckling or "sheepisly" laughing, then my handle would have been.....you guessed it, Nervously Chuckles. I think you're just trying to project what you think I feel because I bring so much to the table and you so little and so you want to even up the odds a little bit by making me seem like I am less sure of the stuff I type.
It's got to hurt to only have a half a brain. HA.......HA........HA
WWJD, I just looked at your next claim, that the authors of Job kenw "thunder and lightning were related (as anybody who has both eyes and ears knows anyhow) but it doesn't come close to saying that. Here it is:
22 “Have you entered the storehouses of the snow
or seen the storehouses of the hail,
23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?
24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?
25 Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain,
and a path for the thunderstorm,
26 to water a land where no one lives,
an uninhabited desert,
27 to satisfy a desolate wasteland
and make it sprout with grass?
The web site you have beencopying and pasting from is obviously garbage. I can't wait to get to photsynthesis, BTW.
So you are changing your name from Chuckles to Guffawing now? You are as bad as Adelina. Where has she been anyways?
Ok, here is what WWJD cites as evidence about plants and sunshine (verse 16 to be precise).
13 Such is the destiny of all who forget God;
so perishes the hope of the godless.
14 What they trust in is fragile[a];
what they rely on is a spider’s web.
15 They lean on the web, but it gives way;
they cling to it, but it does not hold.
16 They are like a well-watered plant in the sunshine,
spreading its shoots over the garden;
17 it entwines its roots around a pile of rocks
and looks for a place among the stones.
18 But when it is torn from its spot,
that place disowns it and says, ‘I never saw you.’
19 Surely its life withers away,
and from the soil other plants grow.
This guy has gone beyond stretching the truth. He is a liar.
To be fair, at least I'm consistant and refer to my other handles instead of letting people guess.
I do miss Adelina though, she definitly sparked some debate, maybe she was a CNN mod in disguise?
This is WWJD's proof that the Bible correctly refers to light being split into component colors (verse 24 to be precise).
22 “Have you entered the storehouses of the snow
or seen the storehouses of the hail,
23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?
24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?
25 Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain,
and a path for the thunderstorm,
26 to water a land where no one lives,
an uninhabited desert,
27 to satisfy a desolate wasteland
and make it sprout with grass?
Ok, I'm out. They guy is a complete fu.cking fraud.
@Colin
I'm shocked you made it this far. I would have just started taking quotes from my own personal bible and presenting them as proof of why WWJD is wrong.
"If a person cites a book as proof, you may call them an idiot and brand them a liar" Chortles 1:4
"Be excellent to each other" Wyld Stallyions 5:15
"Don't pay attention to this book, it is all foma" amuesed 15:32
"WWJD is an idiot " Chuckles 17:29
And just to round out. Here is WWJD's citation for atoms. verse 20.
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
I just think the writers did not know science like we do now. They wrote in terms that they knew
@JW
That's as clear as day, but what Colin, me and so many others before us are doing is showing the authors of the bible, far from knowing the future and the advanced science that we have discovered were just describing the world around them in their terms and their level of knowledge. To try and bend their words almost into nothingness to make them fit into today's theories is actually just incredibly depressing to see, I personally see it as a white flag from the main contingent of believers who want to believe everything science has acheived but refuse to give up god just yet.
Well I don't think you have to give up God. God could still be there despite if the writers had written things that we do not believe. I could write a book about my belief in God, and I may say it was inspired by God, but that would not necessarily mean that God dictated every pen stroke that I made. I think some of the Bible is probably written to fit in with the culture of the time, but that is probably true of other religions too. Example is the Koran said it is honorable to participate in jihad, but I don't think most Muslims believe that outside of the extreme radical ones.
Oh come on J.W., that is apologist nonsense at its worse. They were ranting on about the power of god. Please, read the cites he gives. I set a few out. They had not the slightest idea about gravity, photosynthesis, prisming of white light, and sub atomic particles, etc.
In fact, this little exercise of fact checking WWJD has opened my eyes to just how far fundamentalists will go in lying to maintian their faith and how mindlessly stupid they are, in that they regularly cite evolutionary concepts as support for creationism.
Honestly, you almost want to throttle the morons for speading such utter garbage.
I dont think it is apologetic nonsense. Why does the Bible need to be scientifically accurate? I mean the writers wrote what they thought. When the writer of Genesis wrote the story of creation, yeah God didn't tell him it was all evolution. The people who wrote the Bible were just people so it could easily have scientific inaccuracies.
Unless you were talking about what WWJD said as being nonsense. I couldnt tell if you meant him or me as far as the nonsense.
JW – It doesn't have to be scientifically accurate, but, that is what WWJD claimed (read his posts) and I was rebuffing his suggestions. As to the "nonsense" I was referring to him.
Humans are NOT the most recently evolved animals. What the hell is the "seed of life"? Most of what you are saying is meaningless verbiage.
Romans 1 20: For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
Yep, who needs chemistry and physics when you have THIS sort of explanation of matter, eh?
WWJD is liar and fraud!
You know WWJD, you are right. Evolutionists who say dinorours died out 65 million years before man arrived are silly. Another theory I hate is that of human birth.
It is OBVOIUS to me that storks bring babies! I have never seen a woman giving birth, but I have seen a lot of storks, especially on margarine containers. If you ever go to the beach, you will lots of storks carrying babies. They look just like pelicans because they carry the babies in their mouths. If women gave birth to babies, there would be no need for a navel, but that is how the stork picks the babies up from HEAVEN.
There is no REAL evidence that women give birth to babies. It is just a THEORY. If they did, why is it that men never give birth to babies? Why just women? Where do boys come from? It makes no sense. Also, why are there only “midwives” and never “mid-husbands”?
If women gave birth to babies, why are there still women and babies? And why is it you never see a half-woman, half-baby!! Explain that evolutionists and va.ginal birth believers! Bet you CAN’T.
If you look at a stork, it is INTELLIGENTLY designed to carry babies. Why would that be if it didn’t deliver babies? And what about twins and triplets? What, do some women have 2, or even 3 uteruses? That is stupid. A stork can EASILLY carry two or three babies, but a woman couldn’t.
Why is it that for every 50 boys born, there are 50 girls. What, can a va.gina count? Ha, how stupid. But a stork could. And, what about all the GAPS in the birth record. One time I took a peek at my mother’s va.gina, and it was so small and babies are SO BIG.
You evolutionists are so dumb. Your think babies JUST HAPPENED in their mother’s womb. What, do you think they just appeared out of yucky, slimy blood and stuff ? Fred Hoyle once calculated that the chance of a baby spontaneously appearing in a woman’s uterus was the same as a storm blowing through a junkyard and creating a Boing-747. That’s harder to believe than that the stork brought them!
You might like to think you came from a mere zygote, but I KNOW I came from a glorious stork.
My father insist that I was born because he banged my mother. I derisively call this the Big Bang theory, because he cannot tell me what happened BEFORE the Big bang. And what caused the Big Bang. It must have been a stork.
Fred, WWJD – give it your best shot. Give me the top 10, 5 or 3 if you wish citations of the Bible articulating some scientific fact that we would only later discover to be true. The best, most specific ones there are. You guys keep making the claim, now back it up. No web sites, please, the actual raw data.
Are you new to this belief blog?
Not really, Y?
When folks have answered these questions umpteen times before, aren't ya not tired of asking these same questions over and over and over and ....
#1 How did Job describe something not yet discovered?
“Dinosaur” Names, Then and Now
Name and date first written in the Bible Scientific Name (best estimate) and date the name appeared
tanniyn (dragon) before 1400 BC dinosaur 1841 AD
behemoth before 1400 BC brachiosaurus 1903 AD
Leviathan before 1400 BC kronosaurus 1901 AD
Ok WWJD, that's what I thought. First, dragons do not exist. Second, how do you extrapolate that those terms meant the dinosours you refer to?
the Romans had fossils of some dinos too, they claimed them to be the skulls of dragons or the gods... whatever you get the point... the fact that dino bones are kinda everywhere leads one to UNDERSTAND that finding one doesn't make them exist from that point on... they weren't discovered in 1841 they were just dug up and study to be properly UNDERSTOOD.... silly rabbit, tricks are for kids!
"behemoth before 1400 BC brachiosaurus 1903 AD"
Let's just take one of these poor examples shall we...
Let us examine the specific verses in question (KJV):
15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.
19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.
20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play.
21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens.
22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about.
23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares.
In regards to verse 15, sauropods were vegetarians, but they included many species, and some variation in their dentition and likely diets. Most are thought to have fed mainly on cycads, conifers, and other "rough" tree and shrub foliage. However, since grasses had developed by the later part of the Mesozoic, it's possible that some late Cretaceous sauropods included grasses in their diet. Hippos and elephants eat a variety of vegetation, and among their common foodstuffs are grasses and grains. In the evening, hippos will often come out of the water to "graze." Ancient Egyptians referred to the hippopotamus as the "water-ox." According to Wikipedia, the Russian meaning of behemoth is "hippopotamus."
Verse 16 could arguably refer to any number of animals.
Strict creationists often emphasize verse 17, since sauropods have very large tails, whereas hippos and elephants have relatively small tails. However, the passage does not say that the tail was like a cedar tree in size, only in movement. The verse need not even refer to the swaying motion of a tree trunk, but could refer to that of a cedar branch or switch. Indeed, Michael Bright suggests that the description may refer to bristles resembling the cedar's needle-like leaves which are present on the tails of elephants and hippopotami.[2b] Since the Hebrew term usually translated "tail" here can also refer to any appendage on an animal other than a limb, it may also refer to the motion of a different kind of trunk–namely that of an elephant. Scholars also note that the Hebrew term usually translated "tail" here can, and sometimes did, refer euphemistically to the genitalia of a male elephant or hippo; each have a penis that when erect, extends several feet in length. Those favoring this view note that the term for "move" can also mean "extend," that the preceding verse describes strength being in the loins, and the verse that follows describes "stones wrapped in sinew," which arguably refers to the animal's testicles. In some translations it is even rendered that way, [3, 3b] although many modern translations use the term "thighs" instead of "stones."
While on the topic of size and unusual features, it might be mentioned that if the passage referred to a member of the sauropod group, which includes the largest land animals that ever lived, it seems odd that the passage makes no direct mention of its immense size. And one verse (22) seems to suggest an animal whose size allowed it to be easily overshadowed by shoreline trees or shrubs. Also, if the animal is a sauropod, it seems surprising that no specific mention is made of what may be its most unique and impressive feature– its incredibly long neck.
Verse 18 obviously uses figurative terms and does not help distinguish between a variety of possible animals. Some commentators suggest that the entire passage is largely figurative, and may refer to no real creature (living or extinct), but rather a mythical creature or entirely metaphorical one. As evidence of the potentially broad and diverse use of the term "behemoth."
Dragons do exist, watch discovery. There are Dragons in jungles. Some dinosaurs were considered dragons. Do something educational besides bask in your own know it all glory.
WWJD – If you mean the Komodo dragons of Indonesia – a large lizard, not a drago – that is just the colloquial name for them – how could MiddleEastern goat hereders be referring to them, given that they are confined to a small handful of islands on the other side of the planet? Magic?
did you folks know that the last "dragon" to be killed in history was by the patron saint of england – saint george! it was during the cursades – whats creepy is there was witnesses! lots of witnesses!!!!! thats kinda scary!
oh and colin, its only three islands, the island of komodo, the island that stats with F , lol sry i can't remember and something else.... lol but there is only three in the whole chain of islands, also the biggest on record was 10 feet 11 inches... thats friggin huge!
WWJD
I think the dragon you're sure about is Puff, the Magic Dragon. 🙂
try seeing the world thru Terry colored glasses!
@WWJD
Your last comment was filled with nuggets of hilarity, what's my favorite you ask?
In a list:
1. You decide the komodo dragons are real dragons and say they are the same thing, precious.
2. You call dinosaurs dragons, thus the bible is right because they saw dinsosaurs or something? I don't know, you'r point was alittle muddled here
3. That you call Paul and Colin "know-it-all's" and then think its bad to be a know-it-all, or smart, which implies that they know what they are talking about (and yuo don't) and that god would rather have idiot yes men as his slaves.
I think I'll go with #1, thats a gem right there.
Chuckles, 1 is my favorite, too.
I was going to point out that drangons can fly – but I just knew he would shoot me down with a rference to dragonflies.......
WWJD- are you that jaw-droppingly stupid? You just cited a 35,000 drawing for the proposition that Noah's ark was real, when Noah lived about 4,000 years ago, according to your Bible. You sound like the creationists who cite the Cambrian explosion as proof of the Garden of Eden.
Are you saying there is no God?
Not with the above post, but yes, I know there is no god.
Thought as much fool!
Matthew 5:22
...whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Who here is saying there is no God? that person is a fool
Observer, I am. I am sure there is no god.
There are countless Gods – they're just all fictional.
Pick a God – any God – Eenie, meenie, miney – Quetzlcoatl
What Would Jesus Do? Apperently he would hang out on a message board all day posting web addresses.
Yes he would it he had had one to minister truth to the lost with. He hung out with sinners.
I can see why you choose to post websites. You'll never get Christ's message across with your grammar.
I read the first couple paragraphs. Utter bull. When your nomadic bronze-age shepherds were writing that the earth was flat, enlightened folks said it was spherical. Heck, some of them were already working out the circu mfrence.
http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/index/The_Bible_Foreshadows_Scientific_Discoveries
Good One!
WWJD – you're an idiot.
Paul...your opinion ranks up there with God. Not!
Like they say get real...if you can't play with the big dogs, get off the porch!
Better yet, it you can't outwit the BIG GOD, tuck tail and run.
http://www.icr.org/article/modern-scientific-discoveries-verify-scriptures/
Another for ya chuckie.
http://www.ebonmusings.org/links.html
Done. Not going to play "dueling websites" with a moron...
@Get Real
Thanks, I only looked at one and laughed (dare I say chuckled?) my as.s off for 5 minutes.
provide something with facts, like the artifacts, and land masses, etc. that I have. These sites you provide are nothing but opinion. Give me some hard fact to prove your are right or don't waste my time.
"provide something with facts, like the artifacts, and land masses, etc. that I have. These sites you provide are nothing but opinion. Give me some hard fact to prove your are right or don't waste my time"
Just because something contains a fact does not mean at all that everything else in it is factually and historically true. For example, the Greek legends and myths describe a Mount Olympus where the Greek gods reside. Now, just because there is an actual place called Mount Olympus in Greece that exists, does that also mean that the deities Zeus, Hera, Apollo, etc., also existed and that all their myths and legends are all true? Of course not! In the movie The Wizard of Oz, the beginning takes place on a farm in Kansas. Now, since Kansas is an actual state in the US, does that mean this whole movie is historically true and unquestionable? Hollywood movies often contain actual places that exist such as New York, Los Angeles, etc. yet the stories in the movies are fiction of course. Likewise, just because there are cities and events in the Bible that are known to have existed, does not by any means make all the events in the Bible historical facts! The writers of the time do know of places that exist in their area of course, and it would be natural for them to include those places in their stories.
People did worship the false greek gods you named. To them they did exist, and I guess they did if you consider that Satan is the father of all false religion. So in a way Satan was zeus, etc. The Wizard of Oz was a movie, that is a fact, however, no one ever claimed that the it was a true story or that it was written by direction of God or that it contains prophetic certainties. Big difference. There are works of fiction and works of history and facts. Were all your history books in school lies too? Guess what, the prophecies in the bible line up with your history books. WHAT A COINDICENCE. NOT!
WWJD,
- The mountain called Olympus exists - therefore 12 gods once lived on it, right?
- All sorts of places mentioned in the Iliad and the Odyssey are real - therefore the Cyclops, Circe and Athena are real, right?
- Delphi exists - therefore there really *is* an oracle there, right?
There is not a shred of verified evidence for the supernatural beings or events which you purport.
(sorry, Paul, I was typing a similar post... was called away, and it posted after you) Thanks for yours.
Awwww WWJD
I thought we were going to stick with facts and then you go and bring up something like the prophecies. Nostradamus has a better track record, but lets stick with what you said. First, you blame satan for the greeks believing in the gods? Proof please? show me where satan is there other than the fact that the greeks are polytheist instead of monotheist. I thought satan was supposed to be all evil and junk and yet the greeks have many many stories where the gods come down and protect them, nurture them, love them, doesn't really sound like satan's MO huh.
Secondly, prove to me that the Odyssee isn't as truthful and valid as the bible? Go on now, prove it, show me.
Another for Chuckles.
http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/scientific-proofs-of-the-bible.html
http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm
Bible science debunked:
http://home.nctv.com/jackjan/item65.htm
THANKS!
Now for the deconstruction (or is it destruction?) of this pitiful website you toss up on this board.
First, from the very first line onwards it shows a clear christian bias, which means all findings, theories, ect... are incredibly suspect and should be treated with that in mind. Not to say thrown out, but a lot of implication, theory, even the "facts" are immediately suspect.
Second, the website also immediately begins with a false premise. It says that atheists (without, apparently consulting any atheists) don't believe the bible is true, when it's what they label as people as what most atheists believe and can swallow, mainly that the bible takes place in real locations and probably with real people, but stories, events and probably some people are completely fictional.
third, it makes mountains out of molehills as uses these newly found mountains as way to prove the bible is real. To say that the bible knew the earth was not flat is patently false and they use the term "circle" to prove that biblical people knew the earth was a sphere.....which is wrong. They believed there was a firmament, which we now to be false.
I could go on, but its not worth my time. This website is hilarious and if you were an atheist posting it to show how crazy believers are I would write "hahaha" and move on. It saddens me to think that you actually believe this.
I'm also going to as.sume your chad under a different name because only one with such low intelligence, high bravado and extremem ignorance would post this without actually seeing the wrongness that is riddled throughout it.
Thank you, Chuckles, WWJD hardly deserves your précis, but others appreciate it.
I have seen that web sit. Chuckles, it only gets worse. Some of the claims are nothing short of astonishing. If the authors of the Bible really knew what they are now claimed to have known by garbage web sites such as this, what would be easier than to say it. "The Earth is round, goes around the sun and is one of 8 planets, three of which you are noit yet aware of."
As to it knowing the Earth was round, let me quote from a certain Canadian Doctor (Vestibule) who is himself quoting the Bible:
"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."
NIV Bible, Isaiah 40:22
The Hebrew word used in the original text is "Chug", which means a flat circle, like a coin.
The word for orb/ball is "Dur".
The Bible posits a flat Earth. It also thinks the sun scurries under the flat Earth like a squirrel.
"The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises." Ecclesiastes 1:5
It also referes to the four corners of the earth in several places like Isaiah 11:12 and Revelation 7:1
Web sites like this are intellectually dishonest at best and a public nuisence to those theists who have a genuine interest in knowing the truth.
Colin
Reference to 4 corners was an expression to mean as far as the eye can see or all the land around us.
Reference to God sitting and looking down on the earth was a disc not a flat circle. This is the same view of earth we have when we look down from the heaveans.
Yes, there are different views on these old translations but, you always error to the side of attacking the Bible. You do the same when you post your list of what's a contradiction in the Bible. Yet, your first supposed error is actually you mixing translations to cause the appearance of error.
Now now freddy,
Before posting more inane stupidity, how about you read what you just wrote. Is a disc flat or a sphere? If you answered "flat" you are correct, you have also just proven that people believed that the earth was flat and not a sphere.
Secondly, how high up do we go and still see what looks apparently like a disc and not round? I know in the "heavens" or space the earth is clearly a big, giant, spinning ball, which god is supposed to know, and yet somehow fails to mention that to his chosen. Weird
Also, where is god if he's sitting on some throne supposedly right above the earth? We've been there, saw no god or throne room. Eeek! Better keep searching!
Perhaps no phrase in Scripture has been so controversial as the phrase, "the four corners of the earth." The word translated “corners,” as in the phrase above, is the Hebrew word, KANAPH. Kanaph is translated in a variety of ways. However, it generally means extremity.
It is translated “borders” in Numbers 15:38. In Ezekiel 7:2 it is translated “four corners” and again in Isaiah 11:12 “four corners.” Job 37:3 and 38:13 as “ends.”
The Greek equivalent in Revelation 7:1 is gonia. The Greek meaning is perhaps more closely related to our modern divisions known as quadrants. Gonia literally means angles, or divisions. It is customary to divide a map into quadrants as shown by the four directions.
Some have tried to ridicule the Bible to say that it teaches that the earth is square. The Scripture makes it quite clear that the earth is a sphere (Isaiah 40:22).
@WWJD
The Hebrew word used in the original text is "Chug", which means a flat circle, like a coin.
The word for orb/ball is "Dur".
The bible posits a flat Earth.
It also appears that the concept of orbital rotation was unknown to those who wrote the Bible given that they state the earth is immovable and inert.
"He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved."
– Psalm 104:5
"The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and is armed with strength. The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved."
Psalm 93:1
"Say among the nations, "The LORD reigns." The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity. Psalm 96:10
"The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises." Ecclesiastes 1:5
WWJD – see above.
"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."
NIV Bible, Isaiah 40:22
The Hebrew word used in the original text is "Chug", which means a flat circle, like a coin.
The word for orb/ball is "Dur".
Doc, I cited you on this above.
WWJD you just made jesus cry
"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."
- I see no mention of the earth being a sphere. I see mention of the earth being a circle, but since circles are flat whereas spheres are representations of circles in a three dimensional form, looks like you have just proven one for the good guys! (the good guys being the atheists obviously). Also, if god is stretched out like a tent above the earth, where is he? We've been to the moon, and we've seen.... well we've seen well past the moon and no god? Where did he go?
Evangelical Rule of Thumb: If a bible verse furthers the cause, it is to be taken literally. If a bible verse is detrimental to the cause, it is either: taken out of context; is allegorical; refers to another verse somewhere else; is a translation or copyist's error; means something other than what it actually says; Is a mystery of god or not discernible by humans; or is just plain magic.
(thanks to @David Johnson)
Chuckles
You know as well as I do that God does not sit on a throne even though you do not believe in him you know this. God is looking on the tiny sphere from way out and it looks like a disc, a circle. We are speaking of a view to give perspective of God over the small grasshoppers. Yes, most translators wonder about disc vs circle. If God wanted to say the earth was flat as a pancake he would have done so. Everything God intends people to get right he is very clear about.
Your starting to sound a bit like your ancestors that demanded a sign from Jesus that they may believe. Jesus said the only sign you will be given is the sign of Jonah 3 days in the Fish. I would think it would drive you nuts to look at that verse and not understand why the Ninevetes believed while you cannot. I think it would drive you nuts that Christians can see miracles yet you cannot get past the fish.
Fred,
I grow weary of trying to correct you, point out all the idiotic statements you make. Honestly, figure it out. If god can still see humans the size of grasshoppers, he wouldn't be outside of the earths atmosphere. Also, spheres look like spheres no matter how far out you are, they don't just magically lose their depth and dimension because you get far enough away and if god wanted to be clear the earth was a sphere, he wouldn't have thrown in the little nugget about the firmament.
Lets also have a little chat about miracles freddy, I would love to see a miracle, it would be neat, out of this world and awe inspiring, but just because my ancestor were smart enough not to take someons 'word for it" that someone lived inside a giant fish for 3 days doesn't mean its sad or frustrating for me to not have seen it. It makes me more sad that you think someone did in fact live inside a giant fish for 3 days and can accept that on its face.
now run along freddy, the grown-ups are discussing real things.
@Chuckles
Apparantly, Fred's God has no depth perception.
Perhaps He is a pirate and sports a celestial eye-patch.
Yaaaaarrrrr mateys!
Chuckles
Sorry, the moon looks like a "Chug" to me from here........my mind goes "Dur" . Translation you see what you want to see. Which gets us back to the fish. Jonah was one of your relatives. The moral of the story is it is nice to have relatives visit but like a fish they begin to stink after 3 days.
Colin will undoubtedly get out his Hebrew translator and conclude it was not a fish story but a whale of a story. Either way you guys might just try to look at the Bible for what is. I would love for you see it with my eyes, unfortunately the image would be processed by your brains. Does it not make you wonder why the tree of knowledge was the only thing off limits in the garden.
@Fred
I didn't realize you and god had the same eye sight? So you're saying since the moon looks like a circle instead of a sphere, that's what it would look like to god too? And here I thought god would have had 20/20 eyesight.
The main issue I see fred, is that being smart is looked down upon and it apparently stems from the bible, calling knowledge evil. Fred, knowledge is not evil and should never be regarded as such. Just because you are willfully ignorant and try to return to the bliss of stupidity does not mean you should bring others down to your level, capiche?
Chuckles
That is what I am trying to point out. In the beginning it was the choice of knowledge to be like God that brought about the separation from God. To be like God released pride within. Pride is a tread in the Bible and one of the few things God hates. This is because it drives evil and evil thrives on it. Pride or the appearance of pride in a people also brings out the worst in others towards them. The leaders of Israel and the leaders of Iran seem to have that trait and are descended from Abraham. The good son Isaac and Ishmael the one who attacks his brother. Neither one can see their false pride and the cause of their current hostilities. They both eagerly await their respective messiah of their own making and they both reject the God that is and always has been who came and lived among them 2,000 years ago. The Jewish leaders demanded a sign from God several times and did not receive one. Aside from their obvious atti-tude issues they were not given a sign because they received one and rejected it. God repeats the important things and here are but two. Jonah pointed to the cross, the result for those that believed (Nineveh) was they repented and returned to God –Nineveh was spared. This was written in their Scripture which they knew well. When the rich man died he begged Abraham to send Lazarus back from the dead to warn his brothers ….”if they did not believe Moses and the prophets they will not believe even one risen from the dead.” In short they do not believe the Bible and do not believe Christ rose on the 3rd day.
This is why you cannot see miracles.
"Pride is a tread in the Bible and one of the few things God hates. "
Yet you take so much pride in your constant posting here so God must really hate you!
@fred
I won't lie, I stopped about 1/3 of the way through your dumb post. You said something about god being angry at pride, as if knowledge and pride are the same thing, and apparently added onto the list of "things god hates" pride is one them, along with left handed people and figs.
I don't reject miracles because I want to fred. I reject reports of miracles when they are clearly hoaxes. Sorry you are such an idiot and rube to think otherwise, let me know how life works out for you when you want a miracle and you get it.
Fred, nice mythology. I've got more for you: Jesus eloped with Paul, Snow White did a p0rn flick on the moon with all seven dwarves plus Nancy Reagan, and Bilbo and Harry Potter are in a relationship.
Seriously, that you and I interpret your bible so differently means that your god has some communication problems. In short, your god is not omnipotent, and simply does not exist.
fred, present your evidence for even one "miracle" having a divine cause. The event and the evidence must be recent and it must be possible to examine it.
(but if you succeed with that and the evidence holds up, you'll be the first.)
Goffawing
Thank you for the kind wishes. I have already received a miracle which is probably the only reason I came to believe. You make a good point. The Bible gives strong warning to beware of antichrists that will show great miracles in the final days. I dont think we are there yet but getting closer every day.
The tie to knowledge was that it was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Knowledge was not the problem (I was just poking Chuckles) as it is a gift from God. The good and evil part is what man could not handle. Pride came from wanting to be like God who is all good and that is all man knew in the garden. Going for the knowledge of good and evil was a problem because once you touch evil you can never unknow what you know. Like being a virgin more than once.
Dr Zeuss
Bob
Tpically we find exactly what we are looking for when reading the Bible. Seeing what the good Dr. found speaks volumes about the Drs. god and his beliefs.
Miracles today as 2,000 years ago often come with a purpose. Jesus did many miralce to fulfill prophacy or as a sign. You are right Bob we will not see a dead man rise from a grave like Jesus friend and neither of us will ever walk on water. All the miracles I have seen may amaze doctors but, even they acknowledge it just happens some times. Even my own personal miracles can be explained as coincodence or luck. It was only after I knew Christ that the apparent unexplainable became miracles to me. Prior to that it was a bunch of whooie
fred, Regarding the perception of "miracles". Have you ever heard the term "suspension of disbelief'? It's what we do, for example, when we watch Babe the pig or Mr. Ed talk on film. For a short time, it is enjoyable to do this to be able to get into the ambiance of the movie. We (most of us, anyway) reinstate reality when the show is over - we don't expect our dog to start talking. People can suspend disbelief or squelch reality anytime they put their minds to it; but to live there is simply not authentic.
Dr. Doolittle
Yeah, I worry about that sometimes unfortunately I cannot seem to go back to the non caring agnostic I once was. I changed completly when Jesus came into my life. I am still young so I may have an un conversion experience (especially if I stay on site much longer) some day. Until then I keep putting others first and me next which is good for others (most of the time). Yes, I spend a little time in prayer each day and then there is church on Sundays. I do that instead of watching football and partying all night, I think its a win win situation for me so far.
@fred – "I cannot seem to go back to the non caring agnostic I once was."
What does caring for others and belief in God have to with each other? Did you not get the same enjoyment out of doing something nice for someone? Doesn't giving feel better than receiving regardless of whether you believe in a deity or not?
If you do feel that people that believe in a "God" are more moral than atheists or agnostics please provide evidence of this. From all the research and statistics I have read one might conclude just the opposite.
GodPot
I was not suggesting agnostics were as bad as I was just that I cannot go back to that lifestyle.
You are correct, even the Bible confirms that religeous types are everybit as bad. Seemed Jesus spent more time blasting the religeous ones whereas all the rest he was always helping and serving.
@fred – I will concede that there are those who are living with little to no moral compass and most often it's not that they just havn't been given a hope to live for or just haven't accepted Christ yet that causes this. It's most often children being raised by hurt, angry and disillusioned parents who felt betrayed or lied to by their Church or others and pass on a predisposition towards anarchy and a rejection of establishment no matter where it's found, whether its the Church, Police or peers.
However, there are even more children raised by so-called Christian parents that ignore them in favor of putting on an outward show of being the perfect Christian family while underneath their children feel abandoned and unloved. They also often go out into the world with a cynical view of morality.
Recent, check it out!
http://israelsmessiah.com/biblical_archaeology/recent_discoveries.htm
In the nicest way possible, no one gives a sh.it about your trumped up fake websites about discoveries that aren't true, stop wasting people's time.
thanks!
WWJD-Thanks for sharing some of these wonderful websites.
Ah, what can be said for those other fools that live in fool's paradise and refuse to seek truth
How can you tell they aren't true?
Chuckles....it's very true. You atheists want facts, there they are. Disprove them then. I hope it scares you straight to God. You denial is a sign of fear that you are wrong.
Sorry I should have been more specific, your implication of what these discoveries mean is just sad and pathetic. Do you think proving that the bible was set in a real time and a real place will give it verification.
WWJD, you're right, we (atheists) do want facts and proof, but when I ask for facts I guess I should be more clear since you feel that 2+2=4 is a fact and that it implies something, I want a fact with proven evidence of god, kiddo. If you can show me, in any of these websites, that any of these archeological finds shows a fossil of god, then I'll help you spread the links.
Challange offered, now lets see the cowardly christians reject.....
God would have to be dead for that and he is very much alive so a fossil of God is never going to happen. He is the beginning and the End, the first and the last.
"Ah, what can be said for those other fools that live in fool's paradise and refuse to seek truth."
Ignornace is what God wants for humanity.
How else to explain the moral of the story of Eden – Seek ye not knowledge, lest God cast you out.
Doc Vestibule...knowledge was the lie of the serpent, stating we would be like God. Are you like God?
@WWJD
Doesn't the Bible state that we are all created in God's image?
Is God not both anthropocentric and anthropomorphic?
"serpent, stating we would be like God. Are you like God?"
Tou really believe in talking snakes. WOW!
@WWJD
"Are you like God?"
Well lets see
Helping Africans:
Man – 1 God – 0
Creating weapons that can hurl fire, destroy whole cities by raining fire, etc...
Man -1 God – 1
The removal of disease like polio and smallpox
Man – 1 God -0 (though I guess I'll give god a .5 for creating the disease in the first place)
Wow, just from those couple of things, it looks like we are like god huh?
http://bibleprobe.com/exodus.htm
If a real smart "God" had written the Bible correctly, there would be no need for all of this interpretation and misinterpretation... and oops!... off to Hell with you if you get it wrong.
Please keep your bibleprobe away from my sensitive orifices!
There will always be children of rebellion. It wouldn't matter if is was written in 1st grade level for you, you would still choose rebellion.
You just keep rebelling against reality. A fantasy world is your coping mechanism - enjoy; but you may not proclaim it as truth.
Keep that bibleprobe away from my koranhole!!
You people do not believe in free speech. My comments do not post at this site. Sad.
TGR...
Bad letter combinations / words to avoid if you want to get past the CNN automatic filter:
Many, if not most, are buried within other words, so use your imagination.
You can use dashes, spaces, or other characters to modify the "offending" letter combinations.
---
ar-se.....as in ar-senic.
co-ck.....as in co-ckatiel, co-ckatrice, co-ckleshell, co-ckles, etc.
co-on.....as in rac-oon, coc-oon, etc.
cu-m......as in doc-ument, accu-mulate, circu-mnavigate, circu-mstances, cu-mbersome, cuc-umber, etc.
cu-nt.....as in Scu-ntthorpe, a city in the UK famous for having problems with filters...!
ef-fing...as in ef-fing filter
ft-w......as in soft-ware, delft-ware, swift-water, drift-wood, etc.
ho-mo.....as in ho-mo sapiens or ho-mose-xual, ho-mogenous, etc.
ho-rny....as in tho-rny, etc.
jacka-ss...yet "ass" is allowed by itself.....
ja-p......as in j-apanese, ja-pan, j-ape, etc.
koo-ch....as in koo-chie koo..!
nip-ple
o-rgy….as in po-rgy, zo-rgy, etc.
pi-s......as in pi-stol, lapi-s, pi-ssed, therapi-st, etc.
p-orn… as in p-ornography
pr-ick....as in pri-ckling, pri-ckles, etc.
que-er
ra-pe.....as in scra-pe, tra-peze, gr-ape, thera-peutic, sara-pe, etc.
se-x......as in Ess-ex, s-exual, etc.
sh-@t.....but shat is okay – don't use the @ symbol there.
sl-ut
sn-atch
sp-ic.....as in disp-icable, hosp-ice, consp-icuous, susp-icious, sp-icule, sp-ice, etc.
sp-oon
sp-ook… as in sp-ooky, sp-ooked
strip-per
ti-t......as in const-itution, att-itude, ent-ities, alt-itude, beat-itude, etc.
tw-at.....as in wristw-atch, nightw-atchman, etc.
va-g......as in extrava-gant, va-gina, va-grant, va-gue, sava-ge, etc.
who-re....as in who're you kidding / don't forget to put in that apostrophe!
wt-f....also!!!!!!!
–
There are more, some of them considered "racist", so do not assume that this list is complete.
The fault is yours. This blog has a bot filter that will not allow posts with predetermined "bad" words or fragments within words. A list of offending letter combinations has and will be posted.
eg. circu.mstance will not post without the embedded period since C U M is inside it. Same for Ti.tle which has T I T.
Edit your post.
I don't use any profanity in my posts. Just truth. Some people don't like truth.
"I don't use any profanity in my posts. Just truth. Some people don't like truth."
Did you NOT read any of the above? It's letter combos that get filtered, not just profanity. It's stupidity the site doesn't like. For once I'm grateful for the thing, if it's keeping you out.
http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/sodom.html
http://biblicalstudies.info/top10/schoville.htm
Observers favorite line, pick and choose your verse. Drunkards are mentioned in the same verse as ho mo $exuals as not making it into heaven. Let us substi-tute a picture of two alcoholics chuggen down a couple of Buds in front of the cross of Christ. How does that change our arguments? Some drunkards are born that way others get caught up in the lifestyle due to socioeconomic and other environmental influences. The church has great outreach programs and even AA is based on a higher power (Jesus for me and e^x for Colin). The vast majority of Christians embrace drunkards and reach out to help yet do not allow excess drinking in church. Why are we not breaking down the walls of the church to back a Bud van into the pews?
fred, re "Why are we not breaking down the walls of the church to back a Bud van into the pews?", "Bud"? Really? Churchgoers would seem to have really bad taste in beer, or maybe that's just you.
But seriously, getting drunk is mostly a choice. Being gay is not a choice, whether for humans or for other animals.
No one is really born an alcoholic. Alcoholism is easily treatable. The Bible does not say it is a sin to drink, but drunkedness. That means if it gets to the level of being an alcoholic so that you neglect everything else, that would be a sin.
Bob
$exual orientation is not a choice true. What you do with your orientation is a choice. Last I heard there seems to be some biological cause for addiction that is hereditary so the drunkard needs to make a choice.
J.W
The bible says you should not drink if it causes someone else to fall. But, yes a little wine is ok, not so sure about getting drunk though if your not hurting anyone. Then again you are killing brain cells and I do some dumb sinfull sins when I drink.
fred... why don;t you regale us with what noah became after the flood – tell us... did he got into heaven hum?
@Fred
o GOD HATES LEFT HANDED PEOPLE
You have a choice not to act on your wicked left-handedness and live a godly life!
"A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left."
– Ecclesiastes 10:2
"The right hand of the lord doeth valiantly, the right hand of the lord is exalted."
– Psalm 118 vv15,16
Those who know and follow the true word of Christ will be laughing from up in heaven while the lefties fry forever.
Better start using that right hand before Judgement day or you'll be sorry!
doc – but i'm left handed .... OHHHH NOOOOOOOO!!!!
I;M DOOOOOOOOMED!!!!!
GOODBYE CRUEL WORLD!!!
FUK YOU RIGHTY!
@HippyPoet
In order to save your soul, I suggest you find a Nun to teach you calligraphy.
They've always seemed quite happy to rap lefties knuckles with a ruler.
Unless a woman in a habit flogging you brings up other sinful thoughts....
you mean thoughts like that of Albert Fish?!?!?!? yummy! nothing like a lil modern day Medea!
Doc
Gotta hand it to you on that one. ok, I am a bit slow on the uptake so let me see if I understand. Let's assume for a moment that I am straight and genetically stuffed with an abundance of testosterone. I have a choice to go into a singles bar or take a long cold shower (keeping my left and right hand in the air). That is an off handed choice.
Now, I have friends that are celibate (mostly) because they hold a traditional view of exactly what the Bible says. They seem to be ok with it. How about we let people determine their own path in life armed with the truth not a bias against religion.
I don't think you'll find a nun willing to put needles, pins or nails in the particular areas the Fish liked to stick 'em....
ok, Mr. Fred, you took too long – Noah became a drunkard.. it even says in the bible – one night noah got so drunk he left his tent and walked around the village without cloths..his son seeing this helpped him back into his tent and to sleep. He was the town drunk!
yes doc,i think your right, but he did those to himself... i believe upon his death x-ray, they found something like 26 pins all nearly just missing his organs and arteries...insane in the membrain!
@HippyPoet
I'd become a drunkard too if at 500 years old, God forced me to father as many in-bred children as possible.
Poet
Noah was a man and as the Bible is real, God does not sugar coat what we are. Even though Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord he was still a sinner. The life lessons are endless with this tent moment of Noah. The biggest lesson is how his own sons hearts were revealed when they stumbled upon their naked father.
Isn't that exactly what some christians do when they spot ho mo $exual activity.........run out and gather others to point out "sin". Turn the page and we see Jesus blasting hypocrite religeous leaders for doing the same thing to the women caught in sin.
Lots of real good stuff in the Bible that Christians should read. The Bible has the purpose of guiding us towards love for eternity if we just start reading it for what it is not attacking it for what it isn't
yeah, fred i think your insane, but whatever – i don't think noah ever existed, nor do i think the bible is anything but a book filled with other peoples stories that some folks put it together and made it seem as if it was one story! The god who destoryed the world for being full of evil would have surely punished noah for being a drunkard and showing his private parts to the whole town as well as being drunk constantly. That is of course if there was a god!
Poet
You just missed the point again. God was pointing to both sins. The sin of Noah and the sin of hipocrites pointing to sin because of their own sick hearts. Nothing but truth here. Kudos to God !
well to get back on topic for two seconds – you are not born a drunk, you become one thru hard work! 🙂
you ARE born gay! there is no way around this FACT! you can argue it if it makes you feel better, but you can't provide anything but opinion against it.
Fred wrote, " Now, I have friends that are celibate (mostly) because they hold a traditional view of exactly what the Bible says. They seem to be ok with it. How about we let people determine their own path in life armed with the truth not a bias against religion.".
Fred, a celibate gay person is still gay. Just like a celibate straight person is still straight.
Primework
Agreed, and God is big enough to sort things out. It is not our job we come to the table loaded with bias.
Yeah fred, I dare you: go without all man-made medicine for the rest of your days and let god sort out your illnesses. Remember that next time you start heading for a hospital or the drugstore.
Guess what: there's no god. But if there was, a lot of people would love to have a go at him, for all the suffering he would have been responsible for. Thanks for malaria, god. One of your good ones. Not.
Uh, Bob, careful there. We don't want fred off his meds. He's bad enough now when he's on them.
Bob
You do not see God now why would you see him later. Best to know what you’re up against then make a decision. As to malaria there are books upon books written as to why God allows suffering. It is all nonsense unless you know God. It certainly has nothing to do with being Jewish or Christian as we know they not only suffer in the same world you do they will suffer extra because of their faith. The Jewish have certainly proven this part of the Bible true agreed? Christians are still hit depending on country in different ways simply for their faith. So the Bible is true on a couple of key points big deal.
The Bible says disease came into the world because of the fall of man. The reason being that it would be unfair to allow man to live forever (the case before the fall) now that he has rejected God. After man rejected God the plan for redemption was revealed. The Bible says God knew us before he knit our bones together in the womb. Here we are you and I plopped down just where God put us. Let’s say you are rich in perfect health and I scream in pain daily from cancer or whatever. We both die and are held accountable for what we did with what we were given. Always remember we are poor judges thus we are not to judge one another only Jesus can judge with perfect justification. What does Jesus say:
The Rich Man and Lazarus
“There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
“The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’
“But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’
“He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
“Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
“‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
“He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”
To really understand people and human nature, observe what they do or say from a position of safety – as on this blog. People wouldn't say tis kind of stuff to another persons face. They'd get decked ! I propose two options 1) a Creator simply walked away in disgust saying "they are their own hell" or 2) we have simply evolved into a species of self loathing, self destructive freaks. Atheists, in replying, will prove what I've just said.
In the nicest way possible let me just ask what qualifies you to make any of the statements you just made? Let me first tell you whatever I say on this blog I will most certainly say to your face, I might tone it down slightly but I will not shy away from pointing out whats wrong with specific religion, it's why I am a religion minor in college. Secondly, when you overtly and activly stoke the fires, is it crazy to "foresee" that embers are going to pop up? I mean, you make some ridiculous as.sertions and then laugh as what you have guessed as atheists attacking you comes true?
Please try again, Me and some others on this blog are more than willing to respectfully debate if we receive that same respect (which is seldom) and we debate the way debate should happen, with as.sertions and facts with concrete, tested evidence to back it up. If you really do get so offended by the comments on this board, you might want to take a deeper look at your own faith and try and discover why you feel so uncomfortable reading some of these posts, is it because they are pointing out hard truths?
"To really understand people and human nature, observe what they do or say from a position of safety – as on this blog. People wouldn't say tis kind of stuff to another persons face. They'd get decked ! I propose two options 1) a Creator simply walked away in disgust saying "they are their own hell" or 2) we have simply evolved into a species of self loathing, self destructive freaks. Atheists, in replying, will prove what I've just said."
You realize you just did the very thing you are accusing others. LOL! You wouldn't have the guts to say that to me face to face. 😉
Root post by catholic engineer is an instance of the fallacy of begging the question.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/
@ Chuckles
How is it possible for you to read these posts and not detect the hatred and mean-spiritedness? That is what I was refering to. Apparently, your reading of this blog is like some peoples' reading of the Bible: seeing only what they want to see.
@CE
I'm not saying there aren't atheists (and christians alike) who come to troll. That's a fact on just about any site. What you fail to recognize is most of the regulars on this board will joke and jibe, maybe even write some nasty comments, but like I said in the end of my post, if this board can rattle you so much, you might want to rethink WHY its rattling you so much.
@CE – "How is it possible for you to read these posts and not detect the hatred and mean-spiritedness?"
Your'e right, it's very mean for atheists to come on these boards and call you stupid, ignorant morons for believing in God. But what exactly do you imply to every non-Christian you might converse with when debating your God's existence? Would you rather be called stupid or told that you are vile, evil & wicked and will die a horrible death only to be tortured for eternity if you don't accept our version of truth? To me it's fairly obvious which one is by far more hatefilled and meanspirited.
/EINPresswire.com/ November 6th, 2011 - The Chauvet Cave in France's Ardeche Valley has a 35,000 year old mural which clearly shows animals parading from an Ark-like hatch. The 'unnatural' procession of carnivores and herbivores all seem mesmerized, possibly occupied with their preassigned task to repopulate the earth. Tangent art has butterflies and insects, representing the balance of fauna life (Genesis 8:19). Magical Chauvet overlooks the Pont d'Arc (Rainbow Bridge), the tallest natural bridge in Europe. God indeed pledged a 'Rainbow Covenant' to Noah in Genesis 9:13- never again to flood the earth. Enjoy the rainbow bridge; sacrificial altar; and 'Off the Ark' mural art of the End Chamber at this hyperlink below!
If you posted a link I don't see it, maybe it is just my computer.
http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/francechauvet.htm
Saw the cave art. Saw an image of a herd of animals. Didn't see anything that would even remotely resemble a man-made structure. You'll have to do better than that. If you can provide a link that shows anything that resembles an "ark-like" hatch among those cave drawings, please do so. It wasn't on that previous link.
09 November 2011 | 14:21 | FOCUS News Agency
Home / Southeast Europe and Balkans
Athens. It is believed that the tomb of Alexander the Great and the Ark of the Covenant have been found on the Greek Island of Thasos, announced Russian Grekomania.ru, which is information partner of the Greek Minister of Culture and Tourism.
Head of the research group Pitia Nikolaos Kumardzis announced that the findings emerged during amateur excavations. According to him, some unexpected results were reported during the excavations on Thasos Island.
Greek researchers are convinced that the findings really are the tomb of Alexander the Great and the Ark of the Covenant
I pray it is authentic!
Sounds like the poor Greeks are trying to boost tourism to get some bucks into their economy...
Besides, everyone knows that Indiana Jones already found the Ark of the Covenant and buried it in his basement.
I wonder what Alexander's tomb is doing in Greece, since the last historical reference to his remains indicates he was on his way to Egypt with Ptolemy? At least
they already have found the tomb of his father. In the unlikely event that they can find dna, they can compare.
Go Christians; spew your hate! I knew this topic with get the Fred Phelps, Tony Perkins Christians flaming.
A good way for SOME gays and most atheists to make themselves hated is to flood this page with hate, as they've been doing. Fellow Christians, lets refuse to hate them. We have a mandate not to hate.
“A good way for SOME gays and most atheists to make themselves hated is to flood this page with hate, as they've been doing.”
The christians have too.. Hate is defined as “feel extreme hostility toward; detest:” No go and read the comments from christians about these two guys kissing. They used words like disgusting, gross, yuk, abomination, burn in hell, etc…about gays on this blog. Your hate for those that don’t believe as you blind you to the truth of your fellow cult members.
" Fellow Christians, lets refuse to hate them. We have a mandate not to hate."
Some Christians sure have a funny way of showing their non-hatred. BTW – when you tell people that who they are is intrinsically unnatural and goes against god – that they had better repent and deny who they really are or they will suffer for all eternity ... that isn't loving.