Started By
Message
re: Will homosexuality be Christianity's bane?
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:00 pm to 870Hog
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:00 pm to 870Hog
quote:
I would cover my ears and cry at my moms Southern Baptist church when I was little. Preacher screaming how everyone is going to hell.
I don't see the need for hysterics in the pulpit (and black churches are some of the worst at this). Just not my style of worship.
I like my pastors to be teachers more than anything.
1
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:04 pm to Roger Klarvin
All I got? I think I accurately summarized it.
The first video was "evidence" that the OT was written with polytheism in mind and was altered to be monotheistic. The "evidence" isn't evidence at all, to me, since the whole subject of the elohim adequately explains why both monotheistic and polytheistic language exists in the text without resorting to changes from period to period to accommodate various changes in culture.
The second video piggybacks on the first: that the god of the OT was part of polytheistic system, and that it is a concept similar to the narrator's new view of god which is similar to a power rather than a person. That devolved into nothing more than a concept of things that we don't understand or an emotion. It's an attempt to be profound without offering anything of substance, but it is all based on the "evidence" of the first video that was supposed to be final say. In the end, the concept of god was subjective to the narrator which turned into a complete denial due to the lack of evidence (the crux of the worldview here: materialism/naturalism). He rejected the thought of god because he thought it was pointless, and science is the answer or the anti-god, because it provides "evidence" (a point not directly stated, but inferred based on the narrator's search for evidence).
The third video appears to be completely unrelated to the first two except that it attempts to talk about polytheism in the OT. It was just one verse after another trying to prove that there were multiple gods and that God (Yahweh) was just one in many, like the Greek pantheon or something. The entire video was basically describing the "divine council" stuff that I referenced. It's a confusion of what the word "elohim" means.
So yeah, that's "all" I took from the video series.
The first video was "evidence" that the OT was written with polytheism in mind and was altered to be monotheistic. The "evidence" isn't evidence at all, to me, since the whole subject of the elohim adequately explains why both monotheistic and polytheistic language exists in the text without resorting to changes from period to period to accommodate various changes in culture.
The second video piggybacks on the first: that the god of the OT was part of polytheistic system, and that it is a concept similar to the narrator's new view of god which is similar to a power rather than a person. That devolved into nothing more than a concept of things that we don't understand or an emotion. It's an attempt to be profound without offering anything of substance, but it is all based on the "evidence" of the first video that was supposed to be final say. In the end, the concept of god was subjective to the narrator which turned into a complete denial due to the lack of evidence (the crux of the worldview here: materialism/naturalism). He rejected the thought of god because he thought it was pointless, and science is the answer or the anti-god, because it provides "evidence" (a point not directly stated, but inferred based on the narrator's search for evidence).
The third video appears to be completely unrelated to the first two except that it attempts to talk about polytheism in the OT. It was just one verse after another trying to prove that there were multiple gods and that God (Yahweh) was just one in many, like the Greek pantheon or something. The entire video was basically describing the "divine council" stuff that I referenced. It's a confusion of what the word "elohim" means.
So yeah, that's "all" I took from the video series.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:06 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:Some evidence of that would be beneficial, but even so, if it doesn't apply to the specific article referenced, it is a logical fallacy of trying to defeat an argument by discrediting the author.
Answers in genesis has been dissected across all corners of the internet.
To summarize it: They flat out make stuff up and ignore citing sources for many of their claims.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:07 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
I don't see the need for hysterics in the pulpit (and black churches are some of the worst at this). Just not my style of worship.
I like my pastors to be teachers more than anything.
Ever been to a Hispanic Church? Puts hysterics of black churches to shame. Holy shite, these mother frickers do some frickin CHOICH.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:08 pm to 870Hog
quote:
I would cover my ears and cry at my moms Southern Baptist church when I was little. Preacher screaming how everyone is going to hell.
To be fair, the majority of Christians are not like this. Most are either doing the best they can to live like Jesus or ignoring it altogether and just socially associating with Christianity. The hateful, hellfire kind just aren't that prevalent anymore.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:09 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
Ever been to a Hispanic Church? Puts hysterics of black churches to shame.
Yes. Twice. Never again.
I was scared and they were talking too fast
quote:
these mother frickers do some frickin CHOICH.
That sentence made me lose it irl, I have to report
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:12 pm to FooManChoo
This blog does a good job keeping up with and addressing the AIG claims:
LINK
This site is fantastic and counters just about every YEC claim there is. it is also a fantastic source for learning about geology and evolution:
LINK
The first one is a little more sarcastic and demeaning, but talk origins is pure science. The worst they do is call a claim "ignorant".
LINK
This site is fantastic and counters just about every YEC claim there is. it is also a fantastic source for learning about geology and evolution:
LINK
The first one is a little more sarcastic and demeaning, but talk origins is pure science. The worst they do is call a claim "ignorant".
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:14 pm to Roger Klarvin
That's great, thank you. I'll take a look at them. But it's not really relevant to the current discussion.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:20 pm to FooManChoo
I would jump into this discussion but you frickers are typing way to much for me to read and actually give a frick.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:23 pm to 870Hog
Right there with ya
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:27 pm to 870Hog
Sorry. Some things just cannot be said in a sentence or two.
Maybe I'm just not very eloquent
Maybe I'm just not very eloquent
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:28 pm to 870Hog
quote:
I would jump into this discussion but you frickers are typing way to much for me to read and actually give a frick.
HEY nobody gives less of a frick than Me. You think you don't give a frick? I don't give a frick. Nobody gives less of a frick than V&S.
If you were hangin' from a cliff, gettin' ready to fall to your death--that's right--and I was at the top of the cliff, and all you needed was a frick to save your life, and I had a pocket full of fricks...I wouldn't give you one.
You'd be like: "Hey, Vols&Shaft, I need a frick!"
And I'd be all like: "Ohh, you know I don't give a frick. Here's a frick...psych!"
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:30 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
You'd be like: "Hey, Vols&Shaft, I need a frick!"
And I'd be all like: "Ohh, you know I don't give a frick. Here's a frick...psych!"
annnd *splat*
Posted on 2/11/14 at 6:31 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
HEY nobody gives less of a frick than Me. You think you don't give a frick? I don't give a frick. Nobody gives less of a frick than V&S.
If you were hangin' from a cliff, gettin' ready to fall to your death--that's right--and I was at the top of the cliff, and all you needed was a frick to save your life, and I had a pocket full of fricks...I wouldn't give you one.
You'd be like: "Hey, Vols&Shaft, I need a frick!"
And I'd be all like: "Ohh, you know I don't give a frick. Here's a frick...psych!"
To type that much you must give at least one small frick.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 7:39 pm to Agforlife
quote:
To type that much you must give at least one small frick.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 7:47 pm to PrivatePublic
It's a huge problem for Christianity, but at the end of the day the message of unconditional forgiveness appeals to some really shitty people that use it as a Jesus forcefield for their own selfish lives, desire for exclusivity and superiority, and a constant appeal for their judgemental nature, and it appeals to some really good people who do a lot of good. Christianity has broad appeal.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 8:22 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Oh, and the bible has already been changed. Multiple times. Many of the translations from the original Hebrew and Greek are laughable. The KJV is littered with errors. An entire chapter of Mark was added 400 years after it was written.
Just stop. You don't know what you are talking about. Not everyone on here is ignorant and just waiting breathlessly for you to tell us how the Bible is full of fairy tales and the inventions of men.
On your chapter of Mark thing, the longer ending of Mark 16 was present by the second century and it was in oral traditions present in the early church within decades of the resurrection of Jesus.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 8:25 pm to AlaTiger
quote:
Just stop. You don't know what you are talking about. Not everyone on here is ignorant and just waiting breathlessly for you to tell us how the Bible is full of fairy tales and the inventions of men.
On your chapter of Mark thing, the longer ending of Mark 16 was present by the second century and it was in oral traditions present in the early church within decades of the resurrection of Jesus.
Posted on 2/11/14 at 8:26 pm to PrivatePublic
Yeah, this thread again about how irrelevant Christianity is!
Has there been anything in Western history more projected to be in demise than Christianity?
Has there been anything in Western history more projected to be in demise than Christianity?
Posted on 2/11/14 at 8:41 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
China is at around 6000 years without the God of the bible
What's amazing is that there's probably around 100,000,000 Christians in China. Amazing that they've been able to do that without the God of the Bible.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News