This makes me angry
- Thread starter shawndavid
- Start date
Err ... not really. Let me quote some scripture. Back then a tax collector was like ... umm ... someone really bad. Maybe put pedophile in there. And a pharisee was an expert on the scripture and a worker in the temple, very much like a pastor.
Mark 2:13-18
The Calling of Levi
13Once again Jesus went out beside the lake. A large crowd came to him, and he began to teach them. 14As he walked along, he saw Levi son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax collector's booth. "Follow me," Jesus told him, and Levi got up and followed him.
15While Jesus was having dinner at Levi's house, many tax collectors and sinners were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. 16When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the sinners and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: "Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?"
17On hearing this, Jesus said to them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
----
Hebrews 12:1
1Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us.
----
Obviously this is a low-level runthrough but I have to be in class in 10 mins
The model provided by Jesus for what to do with people you beleive are lost is not just to call them on it. There is a time and place for telling people you beleive they are wrong but the general commandment is that we are live above reproach, "a city on a hill cannot be hidden" -- the process is supposed to be that the non-beleiving see something different in us and begin to seek it.Syrup Beaver
pants log
Tax collector requires a powerful marinade... even after working the meat over with a mallet for a while.
Syrup Beaver
pants log
Does this not then promote the "healing" of those afflicted? I don't know if this is an appropriate passage, but maybe I'm off here.
LOL
Yes eventually. You're right. I think I'm just not being that clear.
What I'm trying to illustrate is not that God doesn't want those who don't believe to be saved or healed. He does; very much in fact he does. The Bible describes God's great sorrow over those who don't believe, plus the life and death of Jesus are his way of showing he walks the walk that match how he talks the talk. My point is about the process and model put forth by the Christ for how this should look in the modern life of a Christian.
In short, I'm disagreeing with the specific idea that Bible supports a Christian not eating dinner with a homosexual because you should be spending your time being in his (or her) face about their orientation. "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." - Romans ... something, I forget the exact quotation. But anyway, we wouldn't be able to interact with anyone
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God -Romans 3:23
It's not even worth explaining to -some- people though. Everyone has their set prejudices against "Christians," and the various myths that go with that.
It's not even worth explaining to -some- people though. Everyone has their set prejudices against "Christians," and the various myths that go with that.
Hillary's campaign is heavily scripted. Its very hard for her to voice an opinion before it goes through several channels, thus when she is hit with unforeseen questions like the Gay military one she generally ducks answering the question. This actually shows that her campaign needs work since its been on the move since she went into the senate. I really think that they thought they easily had it, and Obama came completely out of nowhere.
I'm just looking at this interpreting it as Jesus sitting at a table with db instead of with a straight guy.
I used to work for a dude who was a devout Catholic and he wasted no time telling me and another coworker, smiling matter of factly, that we would burn for eternity in hell. I don't claim to know what's out there, but find it disturbing that those at the poles are so passionate about their claims while possessing the same lack of evidence as I. I like Buddhism the best so far - maybe I'm just partial to the way my calves look under a robe.
Buddhism has immensely helped my life in ways Christianity hasn't. I'm not going to say that I'm becoming Buddhist but it does speak to me at the moment, or at least I can easily agree with it, but thats how the tao is, you get it, or you don't.
Anyhow, most of the problems with Christianity are from the people who like to pick and choose from the Bible to meet their addenda, so many different versions of it doesn't help it either. I'm officially Church of Christ (not International, there is a difference) but I recall several times growing up being told how Baptist and Methodists ways of teaching Christianity was wrong and they would end up in hell, and it always bothered me.
The way I see it, if there is a God, then he/she will get the message of how you worship them, yet they wont like it if you are not bright enough to know when their word has been screwed with by man. Can you tell me a good reason why I should hate Gays, other than 'the Bible says?' Why are they exception? Why should I believe that God spoke directly to Pat Robertson and told him that Castro was the antichrist? and so on and so on...
Religion in the end is meant to make you live your life to the fullest, without being bitter or unfocused. Women can't be the driving force for everything in the universe. There has to be a force, or a level theory to make people live well, and not destroy their surroundings, and religion fits that need nicely.
Anyhow, most of the problems with Christianity are from the people who like to pick and choose from the Bible to meet their addenda, so many different versions of it doesn't help it either. I'm officially Church of Christ (not International, there is a difference) but I recall several times growing up being told how Baptist and Methodists ways of teaching Christianity was wrong and they would end up in hell, and it always bothered me.
The way I see it, if there is a God, then he/she will get the message of how you worship them, yet they wont like it if you are not bright enough to know when their word has been screwed with by man. Can you tell me a good reason why I should hate Gays, other than 'the Bible says?' Why are they exception? Why should I believe that God spoke directly to Pat Robertson and told him that Castro was the antichrist? and so on and so on...
Religion in the end is meant to make you live your life to the fullest, without being bitter or unfocused. Women can't be the driving force for everything in the universe. There has to be a force, or a level theory to make people live well, and not destroy their surroundings, and religion fits that need nicely.
I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!" "Why shouldn't I?" he said. I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!" He said, "Like what?" I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?" He said, "Religious." I said, "Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?" He said, "Christian." I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?" He said, "Baptist!" I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?" He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?" He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?" He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!" I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.
AND
There are gay people who go around intentionally infecting others with AIDS. Does this mean everyone assumes db does this? No, not quite. Apparently he cant even be called on to explain it. I don't see why you could expect the "religious freaks" on this forum to explain the behaviour of some person you knew simply because they professed the same general faith. It's an ignorant expectation, and not something that someone even expects you to do.
Last edited:
You mean you of all people can't google the answer? btw, where do you stand on religion? You always just seem to play devils advocate, you argumentative bitch.
Have you read fly's signature lately? It's pretty much hitting the target.
Religion does not make the world good. Nor does it make people good people. Yes it does have it's redeeming qualities with the amount of charity work that religion provides, but it has caused more strife, wars, sexually suppressed priests more than anything I can think of.
I'm rambling.
Is it just me, or does Buddism seem to be the new black this year.
That right there is a big reason (the main reason imo) they won't allow gay marriage. And why people try to side step talking about it (decoy reasons, not real reasons) like their tongue might crumble and fall off if they do.
Because once they allow it to happen legally insurance companies will be forced to provide family coverage to gay couples. There are more serious health risks ($$$) for gay couples than their are for heterosexual couples, so they don't want to provide the monatary support for it. In essence they are being "proactive" in their effort to keep the money in their pockets and not fork anymore out than they have to.
The government would also have to allow gay couples to fio jointly on taxes. You couple that up with gay couples adopting children (which would also be allowed more readily if gay marriage was legalized) .. and look at all that revenue going out the door. (theoretically, not saying that would happen. Again .. think "proactive" approach).
Kinda like it's now against the law in all states to not wear your seatbelt. Should be a personal choice. If I want to buckle up or not. But instead it isn't my choice to what I do with my life inside my own vehicle anymore. Insurance companies got tired of paying for people who were injured in wrecks that otherwise probably wouldn't have been if they had been wearing their seatbelt. And guess what .. laws were created to control their expense influx.
The government/insurance companies could give 2 shits less about the person(s) involved or what they are doing behind closed doors, or who they are doing it with. What it all boils down to is the bottom line .. money.
They just push it off on the religious fanaticals because they are a good decoy. Because they like to talk shit and spout religion here and there, and people like to get their feathers ruffled about it and fire back at them. Thus effectively diverting the attention/blame from the real source/reason.
That right there is a big reason (the main reason imo) they won't allow gay marriage. And why people try to side step talking about it (decoy reasons, not real reasons) like their tongue might crumble and fall off if they do.
Because once they allow it to happen legally insurance companies will be forced to provide family coverage to gay couples. There are more serious health risks ($$$) for gay couples than their are for heterosexual couples, so they don't want to provide the monatary support for it. In essence they are being "proactive" in their effort to keep the money in their pockets and not fork anymore out than they have to.
The government would also have to allow gay couples to fio jointly on taxes. You couple that up with gay couples adopting children (which would also be allowed more readily if gay marriage was legalized) .. and look at all that revenue going out the door. (theoretically, not saying that would happen. Again .. think "proactive" approach).
Kinda like it's now against the law in all states to not wear your seatbelt. Should be a personal choice. If I want to buckle up or not. But instead it isn't my choice to what I do with my life inside my own vehicle anymore. Insurance companies got tired of paying for people who were injured in wrecks that otherwise probably wouldn't have been if they had been wearing their seatbelt. And guess what .. laws were created to control their expense influx.
The government/insurance companies could give 2 shits less about the person(s) involved or what they are doing behind closed doors, or who they are doing it with. What it all boils down to is the bottom line .. money.
They just push it off on the religious fanaticals because they are a good decoy. Because they like to talk shit and spout religion here and there, and people like to get their feathers ruffled about it and fire back at them. Thus effectively diverting the attention/blame from the real source/reason.
Last edited: