Total Posts:115|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Traditional Family Values

Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

- Marriages should be arranged.

- If a woman's husband dies without having had a son, she must marry his brother and have intercourse with him until they have a son (Mark 12:18-27).

- Many of the "men of God" were not only married, but had at least one concubine (Abraham, Caleb, Solomon).

- God frequently blessed polygamists (Esau, Jacob, Gideon, David, Solomon, Belshazzarr).

It's time us reasonable people start rolling our eyes a little bit more at the "traditional family values" argument. People make this stuff up as they go along. Tradition is transient. Values are subjective. And families come in all shapes, sizes and varieties. Cherry-picking rules from the Bible is also getting really redundant. I kinda wonder how some Christians aren't embarrassed and manage to say certain things (like rawr traditional family values!) with a straight face, ignoring the facts of history and why/how families evolved the way they did, etc. :/
President of DDO
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 2:27:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

Correct. But I think anyone could agree with that. A atheist would prefer another atheist.
- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

One, we are not in the OT laws. Second, Man is the lead and in no way does that men a slave or inferior. In fact men should serve the woman also. I agree with equal rights because men just cant do the right thing and treat women with class.
- Marriages should be arranged.

That was a custom not a Law. Again we are not in the OT laws.
- If a woman's husband dies without having had a son, she must marry his brother and have intercourse with him until they have a son (Mark 12:18-27).

Never say that and in fact prove it. You obviously did not read the passages one bit.
- Many of the "men of God" were not only married, but had at least one concubine (Abraham, Caleb, Solomon).

This was not condoned by God, not once. This was the desire of men.
- God frequently blessed polygamists (Esau, Jacob, Gideon, David, Solomon, Belshazzarr).

He blessed them not because of thier actions but because the promise to bless them before they were born.
It's time us reasonable people start rolling our eyes a little bit more at the "traditional family values" argument. People make this stuff up as they go along. Tradition is transient. Values are subjective. And families come in all shapes, sizes and varieties. Cherry-picking rules from the Bible is also getting really redundant. I kinda wonder how some Christians aren't embarrassed and manage to say certain things (like rawr traditional family values!) with a straight face, ignoring the facts of history and why/how families evolved the way they did, etc. :/:
You should study the Bible with actual honesty before declaring anything.
TheAsylum
Magicr
Posts: 135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 2:52:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 2:27:39 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

Correct. But I think anyone could agree with that. A atheist would prefer another atheist.

While some people would prefer a spouse of the same faith,this is certainly not always the case. There are many people who love and marry a person valuing who the person is over what their faith is, as evidenced by the many interfaith marriages that exist. Under Biblical law, however, this is not tolerated.

People should not be forced to marry a person of the same faith as is prescribed in the Bible.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

One, we are not in the OT laws. Second, Man is the lead and in no way does that men a slave or inferior. In fact men should serve the woman also. I agree with equal rights because men just cant do the right thing and treat women with class.

I believe that Ephesians is in the New Testament. Do correct me if I am wrong. And while we may not be in OT law now, if the Bible is the literally true word of God as you argue it is, this part of Leviticus would mean that God commanded the Israelites to stone non virgin brides, hardly something an omni-benevolent God would command.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:05:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Traditional family values include one man and one woman. Children being born in wedlock. Parents stay together and rear the children, then become grandparents. Lather, rinse, and repeat. It worked well for a very long time and since the assault on the family began, most aspects of society have taken a turn for the worst. Keyword, most, meaning not every single one, might be an exception, etc.
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:06:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 2:52:04 PM, Magicr wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:27:39 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

Correct. But I think anyone could agree with that. A atheist would prefer another atheist.

While some people would prefer a spouse of the same faith,this is certainly not always the case. There are many people who love and marry a person valuing who the person is over what their faith is, as evidenced by the many interfaith marriages that exist. Under Biblical law, however, this is not tolerated.

Yes, please go out and marry a good Christian woman. You may need her.
People should not be forced to marry a person of the same faith as is prescribed in the Bible.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

One, we are not in the OT laws. Second, Man is the lead and in no way does that men a slave or inferior. In fact men should serve the woman also. I agree with equal rights because men just cant do the right thing and treat women with class.

I believe that Ephesians is in the New Testament. Do correct me if I am wrong. And while we may not be in OT law now, if the Bible is the literally true word of God as you argue it is, this part of Leviticus would mean that God commanded the Israelites to stone non virgin brides, hardly something an omni-benevolent God would command.:
How would even know or understand what a omni-benevolent God knows? Are you suggesting that you are omni-benevolent to judge a action of a God?
TheAsylum
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:10:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

Not must; should be.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

Name one woman in the bible who was stoned 'justly'(without rebuke) for not being a virgin. Go head ill wait..

Point: No one was supposed to stone anyone, it was a way to break the sinners hope of being justified by the LAW.

- Marriages should be arranged.

- If a woman's husband dies without having had a son, she must marry his brother and have intercourse with him until they have a son (Mark 12:18-27).

Wow... Jesus rebuked the people saying that.

- Many of the "men of God" were not only married, but had at least one concubine (Abraham, Caleb, Solomon).

Lol, you forgot David (he killed a guy and took his wife; to add to his collection i guess).

Your point? They're all sinful, scumbags.. just like all of us Christians.

- God frequently blessed polygamists (Esau, Jacob, Gideon, David, Solomon, Belshazzarr).

Lol, he didn't bless them for their polygamy.. seriously how did you get to be the 'legend'?

If you want to discuss the bible, you need to atleast understand Law & Gospel..

It's time us reasonable people start rolling our eyes a little bit more at the "traditional family values" argument. People make this stuff up as they go along. Tradition is transient. Values are subjective. And families come in all shapes, sizes and varieties. Cherry-picking rules from the Bible is also getting really redundant. I kinda wonder how some Christians aren't embarrassed and manage to say certain things (like rawr traditional family values!) with a straight face, ignoring the facts of history and why/how families evolved the way they did, etc. :/


Seems like all you did was cherry-pick. It's very clear, that the LAW is only meant to bring sinners to Christ, and the OT Laws, were made primarily for the time in which they were in, and to show the exactness of God's personality-- very anal.

The only 'tradition' that all Christians will hold to, which is biblical, is marriage..

Instead of cake, i wanna cross arms and hit a fat bong at my wedding.. ;)
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:11:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 3:05:55 PM, medic0506 wrote:
Traditional family values include one man and one woman. Children being born in wedlock. Parents stay together and rear the children, then become grandparents. Lather, rinse, and repeat. It worked well for a very long time and since the assault on the family began, most aspects of society have taken a turn for the worst. Keyword, most, meaning not every single one, might be an exception, etc.

Well here's the thing: not everybody wants to have children. I'm one of those people.
Magicr
Posts: 135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:16:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 3:06:08 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:52:04 PM, Magicr wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:27:39 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

Correct. But I think anyone could agree with that. A atheist would prefer another atheist.

While some people would prefer a spouse of the same faith,this is certainly not always the case. There are many people who love and marry a person valuing who the person is over what their faith is, as evidenced by the many interfaith marriages that exist. Under Biblical law, however, this is not tolerated.

Yes, please go out and marry a good Christian woman. You may need her.

What is that supposed to mean?

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

One, we are not in the OT laws. Second, Man is the lead and in no way does that men a slave or inferior. In fact men should serve the woman also. I agree with equal rights because men just cant do the right thing and treat women with class.

I believe that Ephesians is in the New Testament. Do correct me if I am wrong. And while we may not be in OT law now, if the Bible is the literally true word of God as you argue it is, this part of Leviticus would mean that God commanded the Israelites to stone non virgin brides, hardly something an omni-benevolent God would command.:

How would even know or understand what a omni-benevolent God knows? Are you suggesting that you are omni-benevolent to judge a action of a God?

No, I am not saying that. But, that does not align with some of the values some of you Christians preach, such as the value of life.

If you consider the action of stoning someone moral as long as God said to do it, I think you, my friend, need a new set of morals.
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:27:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
What is that supposed to mean?

Think it means just what it says.
No, I am not saying that. But, that does not align with some of the values some of you Christians preach, such as the value of life.

Its aligns with the Bible and God thats all that matters.
If you consider the action of stoning someone moral as long as God said to do it, I think you, my friend, need a new set of morals.

Again, you are asserting you have higher moral since than God. Again that was in the OT before Jesus Christ came and shed his blood for sin. Find a verse that says the such in the NT.
TheAsylum
Magicr
Posts: 135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:29:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 3:27:54 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
What is that supposed to mean?

Think it means just what it says.
No, I am not saying that. But, that does not align with some of the values some of you Christians preach, such as the value of life.

Its aligns with the Bible and God thats all that matters.
If you consider the action of stoning someone moral as long as God said to do it, I think you, my friend, need a new set of morals.

Again, you are asserting you have higher moral since than God. Again that was in the OT before Jesus Christ came and shed his blood for sin. Find a verse that says the such in the NT.

I am saying I have a higher moral than God in this case because I consider stoning a person to be wrong in almost every circumstance. And you should too.

I'm not saying that it does say that in the NT, however it does say that women should be submissive to men in the NT.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:30:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 2:52:04 PM, Magicr wrote:
While some people would prefer a spouse of the same faith,this is certainly not always the case. There are many people who love and marry a person valuing who the person is over what their faith is, as evidenced by the many interfaith marriages that exist. Under Biblical law, however, this is not tolerated.

People should not be forced to marry a person of the same faith as is prescribed in the Bible.


1 Cor 7:13-14

13 And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband.

Seems Tolerated to me.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

One, we are not in the OT laws. Second, Man is the lead and in no way does that men a slave or inferior. In fact men should serve the woman also. I agree with equal rights because men just cant do the right thing and treat women with class.

I believe that Ephesians is in the New Testament. Do correct me if I am wrong. And while we may not be in OT law now, if the Bible is the literally true word of God as you argue it is, this part of Leviticus would mean that God commanded the Israelites to stone non virgin brides, hardly something an omni-benevolent God would command.


Correction:

Romans 7:12-13

12 So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.
13 Did that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! Nevertheless, in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it used what is good to bring about my death, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful.

Like i stated, to Danielle.. No one stoned their kids, and no one stoned a non-virgin.. perhaps you remember this...

John 8:3-7

3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her."
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:37:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 3:29:40 PM, Magicr wrote:
I am saying I have a higher moral than God in this case because I consider stoning a person to be wrong in almost every circumstance. And you should too.

You'd be right.. It is wrong in every circumstance, because we're all sinners.

I'm not saying that it does say that in the NT, however it does say that women should be submissive to men in the NT.

And it says Men are to respect their wives, and give her the d*ck when ever she wants it.. lol

Corinthians 7:3-5

3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:39:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 3:11:43 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:05:55 PM, medic0506 wrote:
Traditional family values include one man and one woman. Children being born in wedlock. Parents stay together and rear the children, then become grandparents. Lather, rinse, and repeat. It worked well for a very long time and since the assault on the family began, most aspects of society have taken a turn for the worst. Keyword, most, meaning not every single one, might be an exception, etc.

Well here's the thing: not everybody wants to have children. I'm one of those people.

And that's ok as far as I'm concerned. If you don't really want them then it's best that you don't have them. There are people who CAN'T have children.
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:50:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
None of this matters anymore. It's all about Johnny loving Suzy or Johnny loving Johnny Etc Etc. Doesn't matter who raises children as long as they can afford it. Mother, Father, what a joke. Old antiquated oppressive bigoted blather.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
jedipengiun
Posts: 169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:50:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

- Marriages should be arranged.

- If a woman's husband dies without having had a son, she must marry his brother and have intercourse with him until they have a son (Mark 12:18-27).

- Many of the "men of God" were not only married, but had at least one concubine (Abraham, Caleb, Solomon).

- God frequently blessed polygamists (Esau, Jacob, Gideon, David, Solomon, Belshazzarr).

It's time us reasonable people start rolling our eyes a little bit more at the "traditional family values" argument. People make this stuff up as they go along. Tradition is transient. Values are subjective. And families come in all shapes, sizes and varieties. Cherry-picking rules from the Bible is also getting really redundant. I kinda wonder how some Christians aren't embarrassed and manage to say certain things (like rawr traditional family values!) with a straight face, ignoring the facts of history and why/how families evolved the way they did, etc. :/

I think it's because Value's are subjective that people do cherry pick from the Bible. People just often misplace the genesis of their values upon the bible. Not every one of there value's, but atleast some of the values have misplaced or false origins.

If there's anything I will allow the theist to do it is cherry pick from the bible. The more consistent with their views then the more fundamental they will become and we can't be doing with that. I mean, can you imagine if people didn't eat sea food, or wore several types of cloth, or stoning gay people for something out of their control and responsibility.
Things that make me happy!

: At 6/22/2012 1:46:11 PM, Kinesis wrote:
: Also, as an Englishman I'm obligated to be prejudiced against gingers and the French.

: At 8/27/2012 10:00:07 PM, FREEDO wrote:
: Every self-respecting philosopher needs to smoke a pipe.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:55:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
How convenient. Ignore all of the laws that might have a lot of negative social stigma, but enforce only one of them and preach that you are following the bible.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:55:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 3:50:52 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

- Marriages should be arranged.

- If a woman's husband dies without having had a son, she must marry his brother and have intercourse with him until they have a son (Mark 12:18-27).

- Many of the "men of God" were not only married, but had at least one concubine (Abraham, Caleb, Solomon).

- God frequently blessed polygamists (Esau, Jacob, Gideon, David, Solomon, Belshazzarr).

It's time us reasonable people start rolling our eyes a little bit more at the "traditional family values" argument. People make this stuff up as they go along. Tradition is transient. Values are subjective. And families come in all shapes, sizes and varieties. Cherry-picking rules from the Bible is also getting really redundant. I kinda wonder how some Christians aren't embarrassed and manage to say certain things (like rawr traditional family values!) with a straight face, ignoring the facts of history and why/how families evolved the way they did, etc. :/

I think it's because Value's are subjective that people do cherry pick from the Bible. People just often misplace the genesis of their values upon the bible. Not every one of there value's, but atleast some of the values have misplaced or false origins.

If there's anything I will allow the theist to do it is cherry pick from the bible. The more consistent with their views then the more fundamental they will become and we can't be doing with that. I mean, can you imagine if people didn't eat sea food, or wore several types of cloth, or stoning gay people for something out of their control and responsibility.


Man, it makes me laugh at how so many people condemn a faith, they have no idea about..

If a person were to live in perfect accordance with the bible, and the LAW, they would be Christ.

Do you remember hearing about him stoning anyone? didnt' think so..

Actually know what you're talking about please.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 3:57:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 3:55:05 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
How convenient. Ignore all of the laws that might have a lot of negative social stigma, but enforce only one of them and preach that you are following the bible.


Stick to shoving pencils in your @ss and anylizing how your sh*t evolves dude..

You have no idea what you're talking about here.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
jedipengiun
Posts: 169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 4:05:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 3:55:34 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:50:52 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

- Marriages should be arranged.

- If a woman's husband dies without having had a son, she must marry his brother and have intercourse with him until they have a son (Mark 12:18-27).

- Many of the "men of God" were not only married, but had at least one concubine (Abraham, Caleb, Solomon).

- God frequently blessed polygamists (Esau, Jacob, Gideon, David, Solomon, Belshazzarr).

It's time us reasonable people start rolling our eyes a little bit more at the "traditional family values" argument. People make this stuff up as they go along. Tradition is transient. Values are subjective. And families come in all shapes, sizes and varieties. Cherry-picking rules from the Bible is also getting really redundant. I kinda wonder how some Christians aren't embarrassed and manage to say certain things (like rawr traditional family values!) with a straight face, ignoring the facts of history and why/how families evolved the way they did, etc. :/

I think it's because Value's are subjective that people do cherry pick from the Bible. People just often misplace the genesis of their values upon the bible. Not every one of there value's, but atleast some of the values have misplaced or false origins.

If there's anything I will allow the theist to do it is cherry pick from the bible. The more consistent with their views then the more fundamental they will become and we can't be doing with that. I mean, can you imagine if people didn't eat sea food, or wore several types of cloth, or stoning gay people for something out of their control and responsibility.


Man, it makes me laugh at how so many people condemn a faith, they have no idea about..

If a person were to live in perfect accordance with the bible, and the LAW, they would be Christ.

Do you remember hearing about him stoning anyone? didnt' think so..

Actually know what you're talking about please.

Are you telling me that there is nothing in the bible about stoning homosexuals?
Or that if a person does choose to ignore some of the biblical mandates that they can still get into heaven? If so, which and how do they choose? Do they do whatever jesus did?
Things that make me happy!

: At 6/22/2012 1:46:11 PM, Kinesis wrote:
: Also, as an Englishman I'm obligated to be prejudiced against gingers and the French.

: At 8/27/2012 10:00:07 PM, FREEDO wrote:
: Every self-respecting philosopher needs to smoke a pipe.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 4:06:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 3:57:23 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:55:05 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
How convenient. Ignore all of the laws that might have a lot of negative social stigma, but enforce only one of them and preach that you are following the bible.


Stick to shoving pencils in your @ss and anylizing how your sh*t evolves dude..

You have no idea what you're talking about here.

Lol. Excellent ad hominems.

Why aren't you preaching polygamous marriage? Marriage with a women and her property? Marrying a slave caught in battle? Marrying a rape victim? These are all things that the Bible advocates and I can provide you with verses. Then again, it's not as if facts are your forte.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
jedipengiun
Posts: 169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 4:14:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 4:06:24 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:57:23 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:55:05 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
How convenient. Ignore all of the laws that might have a lot of negative social stigma, but enforce only one of them and preach that you are following the bible.


Stick to shoving pencils in your @ss and anylizing how your sh*t evolves dude..

You have no idea what you're talking about here.

Lol. Excellent ad hominems.

Why aren't you preaching polygamous marriage? Marriage with a women and her property? Marrying a slave caught in battle? Marrying a rape victim? These are all things that the Bible advocates and I can provide you with verses. Then again, it's not as if facts are your forte.

We should probably leave it as we don't udnerstand. I don't know why we don't understand as he didn't point it out... but it seemed a justified statement..
Things that make me happy!

: At 6/22/2012 1:46:11 PM, Kinesis wrote:
: Also, as an Englishman I'm obligated to be prejudiced against gingers and the French.

: At 8/27/2012 10:00:07 PM, FREEDO wrote:
: Every self-respecting philosopher needs to smoke a pipe.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 4:21:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 4:05:08 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:55:34 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:50:52 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

- Marriages should be arranged.

- If a woman's husband dies without having had a son, she must marry his brother and have intercourse with him until they have a son (Mark 12:18-27).

- Many of the "men of God" were not only married, but had at least one concubine (Abraham, Caleb, Solomon).

- God frequently blessed polygamists (Esau, Jacob, Gideon, David, Solomon, Belshazzarr).

It's time us reasonable people start rolling our eyes a little bit more at the "traditional family values" argument. People make this stuff up as they go along. Tradition is transient. Values are subjective. And families come in all shapes, sizes and varieties. Cherry-picking rules from the Bible is also getting really redundant. I kinda wonder how some Christians aren't embarrassed and manage to say certain things (like rawr traditional family values!) with a straight face, ignoring the facts of history and why/how families evolved the way they did, etc. :/

I think it's because Value's are subjective that people do cherry pick from the Bible. People just often misplace the genesis of their values upon the bible. Not every one of there value's, but atleast some of the values have misplaced or false origins.

If there's anything I will allow the theist to do it is cherry pick from the bible. The more consistent with their views then the more fundamental they will become and we can't be doing with that. I mean, can you imagine if people didn't eat sea food, or wore several types of cloth, or stoning gay people for something out of their control and responsibility.


Man, it makes me laugh at how so many people condemn a faith, they have no idea about..

If a person were to live in perfect accordance with the bible, and the LAW, they would be Christ.

Do you remember hearing about him stoning anyone? didnt' think so..

Actually know what you're talking about please.

Are you telling me that there is nothing in the bible about stoning homosexuals?
Or that if a person does choose to ignore some of the biblical mandates that they can still get into heaven? If so, which and how do they choose? Do they do whatever jesus did?


No, I'm not telling you that.. What I'm saying, is that you clearly don't understand the message behind the passge; Homosexuals are not singled out.. and, if you were to be so ignorant, as to ignore the purpose of the LAW, then you would have to ask... why didn't everyone stone eachother? since that is what the law requires.

Everyone deserved to be stoned.. so how can a person who deserves to be stoned, stone another person!?? They can't, and they didn't (hence why no one was ever stoned for being a homosexual, for dishonoring their parents, etc in the bible).

It's not picking and choosing what to believe, its understanding what is actually being taught.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 4:23:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 4:06:24 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:57:23 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:55:05 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
How convenient. Ignore all of the laws that might have a lot of negative social stigma, but enforce only one of them and preach that you are following the bible.


Stick to shoving pencils in your @ss and anylizing how your sh*t evolves dude..

You have no idea what you're talking about here.

Lol. Excellent ad hominems.

Why aren't you preaching polygamous marriage?

Because it's not biblically condoned.

Marriage with a women and her property?

What??

Marrying a slave caught in battle?

If she loved someone from the invading army..why not?

Marrying a rape victim?

Lmao..

These are all things that the Bible advocates and I can provide you with verses. Then again, it's not as if facts are your forte.


Bring it on. The bible is my strongest area.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 4:24:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 4:14:11 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 4:06:24 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:57:23 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:55:05 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
How convenient. Ignore all of the laws that might have a lot of negative social stigma, but enforce only one of them and preach that you are following the bible.


Stick to shoving pencils in your @ss and anylizing how your sh*t evolves dude..

You have no idea what you're talking about here.

Lol. Excellent ad hominems.

Why aren't you preaching polygamous marriage? Marriage with a women and her property? Marrying a slave caught in battle? Marrying a rape victim? These are all things that the Bible advocates and I can provide you with verses. Then again, it's not as if facts are your forte.

We should probably leave it as we don't udnerstand. I don't know why we don't understand as he didn't point it out... but it seemed a justified statement..


Read the entire thread, I've posted my explanations pretty clearly.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
jedipengiun
Posts: 169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 4:26:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 4:21:10 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 4:05:08 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:55:34 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:50:52 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

- Marriages should be arranged.

- If a woman's husband dies without having had a son, she must marry his brother and have intercourse with him until they have a son (Mark 12:18-27).

- Many of the "men of God" were not only married, but had at least one concubine (Abraham, Caleb, Solomon).

- God frequently blessed polygamists (Esau, Jacob, Gideon, David, Solomon, Belshazzarr).

It's time us reasonable people start rolling our eyes a little bit more at the "traditional family values" argument. People make this stuff up as they go along. Tradition is transient. Values are subjective. And families come in all shapes, sizes and varieties. Cherry-picking rules from the Bible is also getting really redundant. I kinda wonder how some Christians aren't embarrassed and manage to say certain things (like rawr traditional family values!) with a straight face, ignoring the facts of history and why/how families evolved the way they did, etc. :/

I think it's because Value's are subjective that people do cherry pick from the Bible. People just often misplace the genesis of their values upon the bible. Not every one of there value's, but atleast some of the values have misplaced or false origins.

If there's anything I will allow the theist to do it is cherry pick from the bible. The more consistent with their views then the more fundamental they will become and we can't be doing with that. I mean, can you imagine if people didn't eat sea food, or wore several types of cloth, or stoning gay people for something out of their control and responsibility.


Man, it makes me laugh at how so many people condemn a faith, they have no idea about..

If a person were to live in perfect accordance with the bible, and the LAW, they would be Christ.

Do you remember hearing about him stoning anyone? didnt' think so..

Actually know what you're talking about please.

Are you telling me that there is nothing in the bible about stoning homosexuals?
Or that if a person does choose to ignore some of the biblical mandates that they can still get into heaven? If so, which and how do they choose? Do they do whatever jesus did?


No, I'm not telling you that.. What I'm saying, is that you clearly don't understand the message behind the passge; Homosexuals are not singled out.. and, if you were to be so ignorant, as to ignore the purpose of the LAW, then you would have to ask... why didn't everyone stone eachother? since that is what the law requires.

Everyone deserved to be stoned.. so how can a person who deserves to be stoned, stone another person!?? They can't, and they didn't (hence why no one was ever stoned for being a homosexual, for dishonoring their parents, etc in the bible).

It's not picking and choosing what to believe, its understanding what is actually being taught.

Ok, I understand that. But what stops the people of today being consistent with their faith?
The fact people of that time were inconsistent with their faith doesn't provide justification for our time to be inconsistent with their faith.
Things that make me happy!

: At 6/22/2012 1:46:11 PM, Kinesis wrote:
: Also, as an Englishman I'm obligated to be prejudiced against gingers and the French.

: At 8/27/2012 10:00:07 PM, FREEDO wrote:
: Every self-respecting philosopher needs to smoke a pipe.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 4:32:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 4:26:04 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 4:21:10 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 4:05:08 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:55:34 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:50:52 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

- Marriages should be arranged.

- If a woman's husband dies without having had a son, she must marry his brother and have intercourse with him until they have a son (Mark 12:18-27).

- Many of the "men of God" were not only married, but had at least one concubine (Abraham, Caleb, Solomon).

- God frequently blessed polygamists (Esau, Jacob, Gideon, David, Solomon, Belshazzarr).

It's time us reasonable people start rolling our eyes a little bit more at the "traditional family values" argument. People make this stuff up as they go along. Tradition is transient. Values are subjective. And families come in all shapes, sizes and varieties. Cherry-picking rules from the Bible is also getting really redundant. I kinda wonder how some Christians aren't embarrassed and manage to say certain things (like rawr traditional family values!) with a straight face, ignoring the facts of history and why/how families evolved the way they did, etc. :/

I think it's because Value's are subjective that people do cherry pick from the Bible. People just often misplace the genesis of their values upon the bible. Not every one of there value's, but atleast some of the values have misplaced or false origins.

If there's anything I will allow the theist to do it is cherry pick from the bible. The more consistent with their views then the more fundamental they will become and we can't be doing with that. I mean, can you imagine if people didn't eat sea food, or wore several types of cloth, or stoning gay people for something out of their control and responsibility.


Man, it makes me laugh at how so many people condemn a faith, they have no idea about..

If a person were to live in perfect accordance with the bible, and the LAW, they would be Christ.

Do you remember hearing about him stoning anyone? didnt' think so..

Actually know what you're talking about please.

Are you telling me that there is nothing in the bible about stoning homosexuals?
Or that if a person does choose to ignore some of the biblical mandates that they can still get into heaven? If so, which and how do they choose? Do they do whatever jesus did?


No, I'm not telling you that.. What I'm saying, is that you clearly don't understand the message behind the passge; Homosexuals are not singled out.. and, if you were to be so ignorant, as to ignore the purpose of the LAW, then you would have to ask... why didn't everyone stone eachother? since that is what the law requires.

Everyone deserved to be stoned.. so how can a person who deserves to be stoned, stone another person!?? They can't, and they didn't (hence why no one was ever stoned for being a homosexual, for dishonoring their parents, etc in the bible).

It's not picking and choosing what to believe, its understanding what is actually being taught.

Ok, I understand that. But what stops the people of today being consistent with their faith?
The fact people of that time were inconsistent with their faith doesn't provide justification for our time to be inconsistent with their faith.


Please define consistant..

The bible teaches, that no one is consistant.. so much so, that if God did not intervene, we'd all be doomed; not one would go to heaven.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
jedipengiun
Posts: 169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 4:40:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 4:32:51 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 4:26:04 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 4:21:10 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 4:05:08 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:55:34 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:50:52 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 2:10:28 PM, Danielle wrote:
According to the Bible,

- Marriages must be in the same faith.

- Not only should a wife be subordinate (Ephisians 5:22), but she must prove her virginity lest she be stoned (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).

- Marriages should be arranged.

- If a woman's husband dies without having had a son, she must marry his brother and have intercourse with him until they have a son (Mark 12:18-27).

- Many of the "men of God" were not only married, but had at least one concubine (Abraham, Caleb, Solomon).

- God frequently blessed polygamists (Esau, Jacob, Gideon, David, Solomon, Belshazzarr).

It's time us reasonable people start rolling our eyes a little bit more at the "traditional family values" argument. People make this stuff up as they go along. Tradition is transient. Values are subjective. And families come in all shapes, sizes and varieties. Cherry-picking rules from the Bible is also getting really redundant. I kinda wonder how some Christians aren't embarrassed and manage to say certain things (like rawr traditional family values!) with a straight face, ignoring the facts of history and why/how families evolved the way they did, etc. :/

I think it's because Value's are subjective that people do cherry pick from the Bible. People just often misplace the genesis of their values upon the bible. Not every one of there value's, but atleast some of the values have misplaced or false origins.

If there's anything I will allow the theist to do it is cherry pick from the bible. The more consistent with their views then the more fundamental they will become and we can't be doing with that. I mean, can you imagine if people didn't eat sea food, or wore several types of cloth, or stoning gay people for something out of their control and responsibility.


Man, it makes me laugh at how so many people condemn a faith, they have no idea about..

If a person were to live in perfect accordance with the bible, and the LAW, they would be Christ.

Do you remember hearing about him stoning anyone? didnt' think so..

Actually know what you're talking about please.

Are you telling me that there is nothing in the bible about stoning homosexuals?
Or that if a person does choose to ignore some of the biblical mandates that they can still get into heaven? If so, which and how do they choose? Do they do whatever jesus did?


No, I'm not telling you that.. What I'm saying, is that you clearly don't understand the message behind the passge; Homosexuals are not singled out.. and, if you were to be so ignorant, as to ignore the purpose of the LAW, then you would have to ask... why didn't everyone stone eachother? since that is what the law requires.

Everyone deserved to be stoned.. so how can a person who deserves to be stoned, stone another person!?? They can't, and they didn't (hence why no one was ever stoned for being a homosexual, for dishonoring their parents, etc in the bible).

It's not picking and choosing what to believe, its understanding what is actually being taught.

Ok, I understand that. But what stops the people of today being consistent with their faith?
The fact people of that time were inconsistent with their faith doesn't provide justification for our time to be inconsistent with their faith.


Please define consistant..

The bible teaches, that no one is consistant.. so much so, that if God did not intervene, we'd all be doomed; not one would go to heaven.

Consistent, by this I mean how strict a person is with their belief. The degree to which the follow their religion.
For example, I know of people who call themselves christians and go to church every sunday. I also know christians who go out every saturday night, get drunk and sleep around. The latter being less consistent with their faith than the other due to the fact they break more rules and commandments.
Things that make me happy!

: At 6/22/2012 1:46:11 PM, Kinesis wrote:
: Also, as an Englishman I'm obligated to be prejudiced against gingers and the French.

: At 8/27/2012 10:00:07 PM, FREEDO wrote:
: Every self-respecting philosopher needs to smoke a pipe.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 4:58:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 4:40:11 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 4:32:51 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
Please define consistant..

The bible teaches, that no one is consistant.. so much so, that if God did not intervene, we'd all be doomed; not one would go to heaven.

Consistent, by this I mean how strict a person is with their belief. The degree to which the follow their religion.
For example, I know of people who call themselves christians and go to church every sunday. I also know christians who go out every saturday night, get drunk and sleep around. The latter being less consistent with their faith than the other due to the fact they break more rules and commandments.


Then I understood what you meant.

No one is consistent, in any way, with what the LAW requires.

I'm sure you mean consistent in a sense more then just going to church every sunday, but ultimately, without understanding what the word of God says, it's worthless to suggest some are consistent, and others aren't .
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 5:04:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
No problem. I like facts.

At 9/3/2012 4:23:44 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 4:06:24 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:57:23 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 3:55:05 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
How convenient. Ignore all of the laws that might have a lot of negative social stigma, but enforce only one of them and preach that you are following the bible.


Stick to shoving pencils in your @ss and anylizing how your sh*t evolves dude..

You have no idea what you're talking about here.

Lol. Excellent ad hominems.

Why aren't you preaching polygamous marriage?

Because it's not biblically condoned.

Lamech had 3 wives, Jacob (2), Esau (3), Ashaur (2), Elkanah (2), David (Many), Solomon (700), Rehoboam (3), Abijah (14). Want more?

Marriage with a women and her property?

What??

Genesis 16.

Marrying a slave caught in battle?

If she loved someone from the invading army..why not?

Sorry, that was phrased bad. Forcible marriage of a POW sounds better.

Numbers 31: 1-18, Deuteronomy 21: 11-14

Marrying a rape victim?

Lmao..

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

These are all things that the Bible advocates and I can provide you with verses. Then again, it's not as if facts are your forte.


Bring it on. The bible is my strongest area.

Have fun.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
jedipengiun
Posts: 169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2012 5:08:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/3/2012 4:58:26 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 9/3/2012 4:40:11 PM, jedipengiun wrote:
At 9/3/2012 4:32:51 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
Please define consistant..

The bible teaches, that no one is consistant.. so much so, that if God did not intervene, we'd all be doomed; not one would go to heaven.

Consistent, by this I mean how strict a person is with their belief. The degree to which the follow their religion.
For example, I know of people who call themselves christians and go to church every sunday. I also know christians who go out every saturday night, get drunk and sleep around. The latter being less consistent with their faith than the other due to the fact they break more rules and commandments.


Then I understood what you meant.

No one is consistent, in any way, with what the LAW requires.

I'm sure you mean consistent in a sense more then just going to church every sunday, but ultimately, without understanding what the word of God says, it's worthless to suggest some are consistent, and others aren't .

If the two people I mentioned before are considered inconsistent and need the intervention of God to have any chance to get into heaven then why do we need to be religious for reasons other than pascals wager?
Inconsistency can't not matter or theism breaks down, surely?
Things that make me happy!

: At 6/22/2012 1:46:11 PM, Kinesis wrote:
: Also, as an Englishman I'm obligated to be prejudiced against gingers and the French.

: At 8/27/2012 10:00:07 PM, FREEDO wrote:
: Every self-respecting philosopher needs to smoke a pipe.