Total Posts:54|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Jesus condoned and glorified castration

Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 10:42:55 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

Or it is just talking about living a celibate life like nuns and priests...
Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 10:59:21 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 10:42:55 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

Or it is just talking about living a celibate life like nuns and priests...

So an eunuch made an eunuch by another man is somehow choosing to be celibate? How do you reach that interpretation?

It's clear what Jesus is describing here is castration.
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
ethang5
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 9:55:01 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

Lol, without a latticework of stupidity, I wonder if any of your arguments would stand on their own?
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 11:25:47 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?
At least he had the balls to talk about what he believed as opposed to being obsessed with talking about what he didn't believe....:-)
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 4:40:57 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

There is not one single command from Christ in anything you've referenced. He was speaking of Jewish custom. He is known for his opposing of Jewish laws and customs. This thread is the same as if you said Jefferey Dahmer put people's skin on his own body and was a cannibal, and then me saying you yourself are obviously a cannibal...
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 8:25:50 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 9:55:01 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

Lol, without a latticework of stupidity, I wonder if any of your arguments would stand on their own?

Well the church certainly interpreted the bible in this manner. Do you deny the existence of castrato choirs?

Instead of an intelectual response defending christianity you just come up with baseless dismissals of my logical interpretations.

Who am I quoting? Jesus.
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 8:27:23 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 11:25:47 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?
At least he had the balls to talk about what he believed as opposed to being obsessed with talking about what he didn't believe....:-)

What's your point here?

Do you admire Hitler for having the balls to talk about what he believed in?
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2016 8:32:30 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 4:40:57 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given.

Jesus condones castration;

"For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men"

Jesus glorifies castration;

" and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

There is not one single command from Christ in anything you've referenced. He was speaking of Jewish custom. He is known for his opposing of Jewish laws and customs. This thread is the same as if you said Jefferey Dahmer put people's skin on his own body and was a cannibal, and then me saying you yourself are obviously a cannibal...

How did you miss that? Jesus talks about men making themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He clearly thought it was an admirable thing to do that God would reward people for. He condoned and glorified castration.
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 2:20:01 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 8:32:30 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 5/16/2016 4:40:57 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given.

Jesus condones castration;

"For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men"

Jesus glorifies castration;

" and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

There is not one single command from Christ in anything you've referenced. He was speaking of Jewish custom. He is known for his opposing of Jewish laws and customs. This thread is the same as if you said Jefferey Dahmer put people's skin on his own body and was a cannibal, and then me saying you yourself are obviously a cannibal...

How did you miss that? Jesus talks about men making themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He clearly thought it was an admirable thing to do that God would reward people for. He condoned and glorified castration.

I condone dying for your country, but don't command it, require it, or even suggest it. If you sacrifice for good it is admirable. You have this wierd concept in your brain that society, culture and reality have always been just like the UK in 2016. Nope. Most of history was ruthless, barbaric, violent, women had no freedom, filled with slavery, had hardcore culture rituals, marriages were arranged, and freedom as we know it? Completely unknown.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 2:24:28 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/16/2016 8:32:30 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 5/16/2016 4:40:57 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given.

Jesus condones castration;

"For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men"

Jesus glorifies castration;

" and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

There is not one single command from Christ in anything you've referenced. He was speaking of Jewish custom. He is known for his opposing of Jewish laws and customs. This thread is the same as if you said Jefferey Dahmer put people's skin on his own body and was a cannibal, and then me saying you yourself are obviously a cannibal...

How did you miss that? Jesus talks about men making themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He clearly thought it was an admirable thing to do that God would reward people for. He condoned and glorified castration.

But guess who did obtain it. The Christian West.

Everything today is the remenance of history and religion. Your country was shaped by ? Christianity. But instead of holding this as sacred, you'd prefer spit in the eye of the beliefs that shaped your culture. You disrespect all of the Christians who died to defend your nation from the Nazis. Nothing is sacred to atheists. Atheists focus on one thing. Themselves.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
bulproof
Posts: 25,218
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 3:59:28 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 2:20:01 AM, brontoraptor wrote:
Most of history was ruthless, barbaric, violent, women had no freedom, filled with slavery, had hardcore culture rituals, marriages were arranged, and freedom as we know it? Completely unknown.
All of which was propagated by religion, it's a good thing that's dying out.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
bulproof
Posts: 25,218
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 4:01:11 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

Another excellent post Chloe.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
bonsai
Posts: 172
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 4:06:07 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs? : :

You would make a great Christian. None of them know how to interpret the scriptures either.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 6:35:41 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 2:24:28 AM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 5/16/2016 8:32:30 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 5/16/2016 4:40:57 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given.

Jesus condones castration;

"For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men"

Jesus glorifies castration;

" and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

There is not one single command from Christ in anything you've referenced. He was speaking of Jewish custom. He is known for his opposing of Jewish laws and customs. This thread is the same as if you said Jefferey Dahmer put people's skin on his own body and was a cannibal, and then me saying you yourself are obviously a cannibal...

How did you miss that? Jesus talks about men making themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He clearly thought it was an admirable thing to do that God would reward people for. He condoned and glorified castration.

But guess who did obtain it. The Christian West.

Everything today is the remenance of history and religion. Your country was shaped by ? Christianity. But instead of holding this as sacred, you'd prefer spit in the eye of the beliefs that shaped your culture. You disrespect all of the Christians who died to defend your nation from the Nazis. Nothing is sacred to atheists. Atheists focus on one thing. Themselves.

"Gott mit uns" the words on the belt buckles of the Nazi soldiers wanting to invade Great Britain. Exactly the same Christian god which shaped the cultures of Britain and Germany.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 8:52:38 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

He did not mean physical castration as anyone who knows his teachings realise, he meant the castration of thinking, ignoring physical impulses in favour of the spiritual.

You really must think your readers are dumb to thin they will fall for such thinking as yours.
bulproof
Posts: 25,218
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 9:18:18 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 8:52:38 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

He did not mean physical castration as anyone who knows his teachings realise, he meant the castration of thinking, ignoring physical impulses in favour of the spiritual.

You really must think your readers are dumb to thin they will fall for such thinking as yours.
What you must understand gentle readers is that there is not a single word in the bible that bears the actual definition of that word.
You need the madman's encyclopedia of all things bible if you are to understand what hoova on the hill meant.
For instance when the word was is written it actually means never and or tomorrow depending context, which actually means smiley face.
The word castration actually means a field of heroin poppies and can therefore also mean 16 legged frogs.
I hope you can all understand how the madman encyclopedia works now, if you can't then just make it up like the madman does.
Thank you for paying attention.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 10:15:30 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 9:18:18 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/17/2016 8:52:38 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

He did not mean physical castration as anyone who knows his teachings realise, he meant the castration of thinking, ignoring physical impulses in favour of the spiritual.

You really must think your readers are dumb to thin they will fall for such thinking as yours.
What you must understand gentle readers is that there is not a single word in the bible that bears the actual definition of that word.
You need the madman's encyclopedia of all things bible if you are to understand what hoova on the hill meant.
For instance when the word was is written it actually means never and or tomorrow depending context, which actually means smiley face.
The word castration actually means a field of heroin poppies and can therefore also mean 16 legged frogs.
I hope you can all understand how the madman encyclopedia works now, if you can't then just make it up like the madman does.
Thank you for paying attention.

No, not a single word, just about every word.

The Bible provides its own definitions by applying reason and logic.

The one who became incarnate by being placed in the flesh of Jesus is described at John 1:14 as Jehovah's only begotten son.

How is this possible, since Jehovah has a myriad of son's, spirit and human.

Since procreation is impossible for Jehovah, since spirit beings neither have nor need gender, the only way Jehovah can have any son at all is by creation.

Therefore all of Jehovah sons are begotten by creation.

So, amongst this myriad of sons, how is any one of them able to be called Jehovah's only begotten son?

The answer is provided by scripture:

Proverbs 8:22
22 Jehovah produced me as the beginning of his way,
The earliest of his achievements of long ago.

Revelation 3:14
14 "To the angel of the congregation in Laodicea write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God:

So the one who became known as Jesus was the start of beginning of Jehovah's creation.

That would make him the first-born, but only-begotten?

We have to look to Colossians 1:16 for the answer to that.

Colossians 1:16
16 because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him and for him.

So, having been created by his father, Jehovah, this one is then used in the creation of everything else.

Hence he was the only one created by Jehovah alone, without assistance from the one through and for whom everything else was created.

That is what makes him the only begotten son of Jehovah.

It is that simple.

That logical.

That reasonable.

That straightforward.

Let's face it, it is simple enough for me to understand so it must be simple mustn't it.
bulproof
Posts: 25,218
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 10:51:40 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 10:15:30 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/17/2016 9:18:18 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/17/2016 8:52:38 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

He did not mean physical castration as anyone who knows his teachings realise, he meant the castration of thinking, ignoring physical impulses in favour of the spiritual.

You really must think your readers are dumb to thin they will fall for such thinking as yours.
What you must understand gentle readers is that there is not a single word in the bible that bears the actual definition of that word.
You need the madman's encyclopedia of all things bible if you are to understand what hoova on the hill meant.
For instance when the word was is written it actually means never and or tomorrow depending context, which actually means smiley face.
The word castration actually means a field of heroin poppies and can therefore also mean 16 legged frogs.
I hope you can all understand how the madman encyclopedia works now, if you can't then just make it up like the madman does.
Thank you for paying attention.

No, not a single word, just about every word.
Thank you for supporting my position. According to you just about every word in the bible does not adhere to the definition of that word.
Castrate=A field of opium poppies. We agree.
The Bible provides its own definitions by applying reason and logic.
Please show us the appendix that applies "reason and logic" to determine the definitions of almost every word in the bible.
The one who became incarnate by being placed in the flesh of Jesus is described at John 1:14 as Jehovah's only begotten son.
And yet you have been twisting yourself inside to prove that create and beget are synonyms and therefore every son your god allegedly created is his begotten son.
How is this possible, since Jehovah has a myriad of son's, spirit and human.
Precisely, the bible contradicts itself incessantly and then you come up with even more contradictions in your vain attempts extricate these contradictions from the bible. It never works btw.
Since procreation is impossible for Jehovah, since spirit beings neither have nor need gender, the only way Jehovah can have any son at all is by creation.
Who is it that claims an omnipotent god can't procreate? YOU, that is so funny.
Therefore all of Jehovah sons are begotten by creation.
That's right all of god's sons are begotten therefore there can be no ONLY begotten son. You're doing this for me.
So, amongst this myriad of sons, how is any one of them able to be called Jehovah's only begotten son?
He can't, as you have made abundantly clear.
The answer is provided by scripture:
Ha Ha Ha.
Proverbs 8:22
22 Jehovah produced me as the beginning of his way,
The earliest of his achievements of long ago.
You might want to reconsider who is making that statement, it ain't christ.
Revelation 3:14
14 "To the angel of the congregation in Laodicea write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God:
Yep still no clarification for the ridiculous contradiction you can't make go away.
So the one who became known as Jesus was the start of beginning of Jehovah's creation.
You're reading something that you have failed to produce here. There is no truth in what you have said because you just made it up.
That would make him the first-born, but only-begotten?
No mention of christ can be found in those passages.
We have to look to Colossians 1:16 for the answer to that.
You have to lie about claims that do not exist in your book.
Colossians 1:16
16 because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him and for him.
And big fcking deal, your michael was created as were all the other angels and men according to your book and according to you that makes them all begotten.
So, having been created by his father, Jehovah, this one is then used in the creation of everything else.
So fcking what, is it your contention that god didn't create everything? Ha Ha typical heretic.
Hence he was the only one created by Jehovah alone, without assistance from the one through and for whom everything else was created.
Where in your definition does create need to be alone. Your contention is create=beget. You twist yourself inside out because you fcked up with your stupid definition and now need to squirm out a different definition that makes less sense than your original lie.
That is what makes him the only begotten son of Jehovah.
You have shown nothing of the sort, in fact you have proven beyond doubt that your stupid attempts to create your own bible have shown you to be the liar you are.
It is that simple.
You are that simple.
That logical.
You haven't come within 3 parsecs of logic.
run out of chars.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
bulproof
Posts: 25,218
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 10:55:08 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 10:15:30 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/17/2016 9:18:18 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/17/2016 8:52:38 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

He did not mean physical castration as anyone who knows his teachings realise, he meant the castration of thinking, ignoring physical impulses in favour of the spiritual.

You really must think your readers are dumb to thin they will fall for such thinking as yours.
What you must understand gentle readers is that there is not a single word in the bible that bears the actual definition of that word.
You need the madman's encyclopedia of all things bible if you are to understand what hoova on the hill meant.
For instance when the word was is written it actually means never and or tomorrow depending context, which actually means smiley face.
The word castration actually means a field of heroin poppies and can therefore also mean 16 legged frogs.
I hope you can all understand how the madman encyclopedia works now, if you can't then just make it up like the madman does.
Thank you for paying attention.

No, not a single word, just about every word.

The Bible provides its own definitions by applying reason and logic.

The one who became incarnate by being placed in the flesh of Jesus is described at John 1:14 as Jehovah's only begotten son.

How is this possible, since Jehovah has a myriad of son's, spirit and human.

Since procreation is impossible for Jehovah, since spirit beings neither have nor need gender, the only way Jehovah can have any son at all is by creation.

Therefore all of Jehovah sons are begotten by creation.

So, amongst this myriad of sons, how is any one of them able to be called Jehovah's only begotten son?

The answer is provided by scripture:

Proverbs 8:22
22 Jehovah produced me as the beginning of his way,
The earliest of his achievements of long ago.

Revelation 3:14
14 "To the angel of the congregation in Laodicea write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God:

So the one who became known as Jesus was the start of beginning of Jehovah's creation.

That would make him the first-born, but only-begotten?

We have to look to Colossians 1:16 for the answer to that.

Colossians 1:16
16 because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him and for him.

So, having been created by his father, Jehovah, this one is then used in the creation of everything else.

Hence he was the only one created by Jehovah alone, without assistance from the one through and for whom everything else was created.

That is what makes him the only begotten son of Jehovah.

It is that simple.

That logical.

That reasonable.

That straightforward.

Let's face it, it is simple enough for me to understand so it must be simple mustn't it.
BTW the subject is what all women have ever done to you, emasculation, but it was fun showing your encyclopedia for the turgid nonsense it is.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 7:18:12 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 8:52:38 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

He did not mean physical castration as anyone who knows his teachings realise, he meant the castration of thinking, ignoring physical impulses in favour of the spiritual.

Are you being serious? Eunuch has one meaning. Eunuch. Christians are always bending scripture to match their views but this has taken it to another level! No rational unbiased person would think this referred to anything other than men literally becoming eunuchs.

You really must think your readers are dumb to thin they will fall for such thinking as yours.

Why is it stupid to think eunuch means eunuch? Not once in my life have I heard someone say that someone has castrated thinking. Your interpretation is illogical. No rational unbiased person would reach it.
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 7:30:45 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 7:18:12 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 5/17/2016 8:52:38 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

He did not mean physical castration as anyone who knows his teachings realise, he meant the castration of thinking, ignoring physical impulses in favour of the spiritual.

Are you being serious? Eunuch has one meaning. Eunuch. Christians are always bending scripture to match their views but this has taken it to another level! No rational unbiased person would think this referred to anything other than men literally becoming eunuchs.

You really must think your readers are dumb to thin they will fall for such thinking as yours.

Why is it stupid to think eunuch means eunuch? Not once in my life have I heard someone say that someone has castrated thinking. Your interpretation is illogical. No rational unbiased person would reach it.

Oh? Let's check it out.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 7:31:21 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Castrated definition

http://www.dictionary.com...
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 8:42:58 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 7:31:21 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Castrated definition

http://www.dictionary.com...

The word being discussed here is eunuch not castrated. What is it about the definition of the word castrate that you think has relevance to this discussion? Do you actually agree with MCB's interpretation of this piece of scripture?
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 8:46:40 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 4:06:07 AM, bonsai wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs? : :

You would make a great Christian. None of them know how to interpret the scriptures either.

You criticise my rational interpretation without offering a counter interpretation while also criticising Christians. Expand on your comments to make your point.
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 8:48:53 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 4:01:11 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

Another excellent post Chloe.

Thanks.
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 8:53:09 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 8:46:40 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 5/17/2016 4:06:07 AM, bonsai wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs? : :

You would make a great Christian. None of them know how to interpret the scriptures either.

You criticise my rational interpretation without offering a counter interpretation while also criticising Christians. Expand on your comments to make your point.

Bosai is Brad, aka Born of God.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 8:56:59 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 2:20:01 AM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 5/16/2016 8:32:30 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 5/16/2016 4:40:57 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given.

Jesus condones castration;

"For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men"

Jesus glorifies castration;

" and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs?

There is not one single command from Christ in anything you've referenced. He was speaking of Jewish custom. He is known for his opposing of Jewish laws and customs. This thread is the same as if you said Jefferey Dahmer put people's skin on his own body and was a cannibal, and then me saying you yourself are obviously a cannibal...

How did you miss that? Jesus talks about men making themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He clearly thought it was an admirable thing to do that God would reward people for. He condoned and glorified castration.

I condone dying for your country, but don't command it, require it, or even suggest it. If you sacrifice for good it is admirable. You have this wierd concept in your brain that society, culture and reality have always been just like the UK in 2016. Nope. Most of history was ruthless, barbaric, violent, women had no freedom, filled with slavery, had hardcore culture rituals, marriages were arranged, and freedom as we know it? Completely unknown.

I'm not ignorant of history. Unfortunately the Christian culture of my country was as barbaric and unfair as you point out. However now we are leaving behind Christianity we have reached our greatest ever levels of wealth, fairness, development, understanding, knowledge and literacy. You have actually proved my points for me. Christianity has long had a negative influence on my country and it's demise is one of the reasons for our current success as a country and as a society.

If I had to pick a time to be alive from history it would be right now. My society offers me more than at any other point in history. Would you have preferred to live in a different era? I'm assuming/ guessing you would?
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
bonsai
Posts: 172
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 8:59:12 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 8:46:40 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 5/17/2016 4:06:07 AM, bonsai wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:24:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 19: 8-12, we read this:

He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."

The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother"s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

In this passage, Jesus discusses the way men can be castrated and become eunuchs. He starts out by saying some are born that way, indicating the he, being God, allows this to happen to innocent male children, contradicting claims he is a just and loving god. Clearly this is not fair, and the only way out of this argument is to admit that God does not control the gestation process and mistakes happen on their own. This implies that God does not have full control of the world.

Jesus discusses the second way for men to become eunuchs " castration is forced upon them. Clearly this is a violent act violating the rights of these victims, but Jesus does not say anything about that. He appears to accept it as being OK.

The third way is for men to castrate themselves, or else allow someone else to do it. Jesus seems to think that this is an act of high honor that only the most faithful can undertake. Presumably, these men will receive preference in heaven.

It should be obvious that this passage of scripture is pure nonsense. It starts off by Jesus stating that men cannot divorce except if their wife commits adultery. He says nothing about the rights of women to divorce their husbands. Therefore Jesus thinks that in no circumstances can women divorce their husband's. Even cases of domestic abuse would not give women sufficient reason to obtain a divorce. Then he goes on to extol the virtues of castration, as if being sexless is the pinnacle of being a spiritual being. How improbable can it be that a god would engage in this kind of discourse? It certainly seems more like the sort of thing a medieval man would come up with.

Maybe a Catholic priest looking to justify the castration of boys to enable the creation of castrato choirs? : :

You would make a great Christian. None of them know how to interpret the scriptures either.

You criticise my rational interpretation without offering a counter interpretation while also criticising Christians. Expand on your comments to make your point. : :

I can speak from experience of being made a eunuch before testifying to the Word. I didn't need to be castrated to be a eunuch just like the many who are born eunuchs. A eunuch who is born into this world is one who doesn't have any sexual desires. So all God had to do to make me a eunuch was make me embarrassed so that I wouldn't want to try sex with anyone while I was being used by him to testify to his Word, which is where we all get our life experiences from.

No Christian has ever been used to testify to the Word so they can't understand this prophecy about becoming a eunuch for the sake of the Kingdom.