Texan Bigotry

[rah]

I'd be more concerned that all we ever hear about is Cain, Abel and Seth. Unless Seth was less manly than described, maybe gay sex can lead to children. Look it's a miracle.

And I'd love to hear the reply. The female children were not important enough to be mentioned. Equality at it's best.

[Nikolai]

Please don't try to give a scientific explanation. We're already discussing the equivalent of a fairy tale so just say God in his infinite wisdom prevented such problems and leave it at that.

You asked, I answered. No need to get rude.

[Nikolai]

I'd be more concerned that all we ever hear about is Cain, Abel and Seth. Unless Seth was less manly than described, maybe gay sex can lead to children. Look it's a miracle.

And I'd love to hear the reply. The female children were not important enough to be mentioned. Equality at it's best.

You obviously haven't read Genesis. Three children is mentioned by name. It is also said that Adam and Eve got several other boys and girls, but those are not mentioned by name.

[rah]

I was not trying to be rude. If you took it that way. Please accept my apology. The only person I'm intentionally rude to here is ben.

And yes, it has been almost 55 years since I needed to read fairy tales to put me to sleep so my memory isn't exact. But at least I remembered the only names listed. Better than I would have expected

[Ben Kenobi]

Quick question BK... do you believe literally that all of humanity is descended from two people?

Yes.

If God intended for polygamy, and gay marriage to be the norm, why are there men and women? It makes no sense whatsoever. It only makes sense that there are men and women, because sex is intended to be between a man and a woman. That 90 plus percent exhibit these characteristics makes sense because that is what we were designed for. Sure, there are outliers, but that's just it, they are outliers.

It doesn't make the outliers the norm.

[Nikolai]

I was not trying to be rude. If you took it that way. Please accept my apology. The only person I'm intentionally rude to here is ben.

Apology accepted. I found your posts a little on the agressive side(what with fairy tales and such), but no biggie.

[Ben Kenobi]

The level of abuse you get here is far, far in excess of anything anyone else gets. We've already established that its not a result of your beliefs (because others here also share them) so what's the distinguishing factor?

The abusers claim that 'it's got nothing to do with my beliefs'. Which usually means that it's got everything to do with my beliefs. People lie, Kentonio. They lie when they believe that not lying will make them lose face.

Gosh, it's everyone else's fault again?

I would suspect that an outside observer would conclude that yes, the fellow not resorting to personal attacks would be considered the reasonable one.

If you're speaking to a known liar, why would you trust them just because they haven't told you a lie yet that day?

If the argument is that x is a liar, how do we know that isn't just other liars telling lies about that person?

It's interesting that you shaped your question so narrowly by the way

It's the topic at hand. The only thing that's relevant to this thread is, "has Ben Kenobi lied about x". Given that you're whining about the perceived 'narrowness', one can only conclude that I have not, in fact, told a lie. Which makes your allegation at best a non sequitor and at worst, completely unfounded.

were you self conscious enough to realize that 'When have I lied?' would have led to an avalanche of quotes?

Given that the folks confronting me don't have anything to substantiate their allegation, I am challenging them to prove their case is actually relevant to this thread.

You have to earn respect.

So that warrants personal attacks because, "you don't like the person"?

[Ben Kenobi]

I didn't say its all about divorce, I said it was about men divorcing their wives without justification.

So now it's not about divorce, yet you earlier claimed that divorce is what Jesus was addressing? Which is it, Berz?

It aint sinful for two people to divorce if thats what they want, it is sinful for men to dump their wives which is the situation Jesus was addressing.

That's not what Jesus says in that passage. "What God has brought together let men not separate".

You didn't answer the question, how do you figure God was condemning polygamy in Genesis when God allowed and even commanded polygamy afterward?

As Jesus himself says, "In the beginning this was not so". The ideal of marriage is one man and one woman. Has ever been thus. Was then, is now.

Many of the patriarchs had multiple wives, Jesus wasn't accusing them of sin.

Actually, yes, yes he was.

So which is it and where'd Jesus say that?

Right there in Matthew 19, a little later down. "The one who can accept this should accept this".

The Bible says it, Hagar was given to Abraham by Sarah because she was barren. Thats polygamy

Sigh. That's not proof that Islam is descended from Abraham. The only ones who say that is Islam, thousands of years later. This is an interpolation. None of the actual sources say anything of the sort.

There's no indication if you look at the time prior to Islam that anyone claimed this connection. Which means that it's a very late interpolation.
The Bible says this:

What nation was God talking about?

Does it say? No, it doesn't. Hey, I'm descended from Ishmael too! Isn't that awfully convenient.

So divorce for a reason other than infidelity is allowed?

It's not marriage if it's more than one.

[Sava]

Can't answer for Ben, but I do. And so do many (most?) Christians.

I would disagree with you on both accounts. First, the Adam and Eve story is demonstrably false. Don't take my word for it. God created this world with all its rules and laws. If you disagree with reality, take it up with him. Also, I think a very small minority of Christians actually believes in creationism.

You are a nice guy and I like you. So I'm not about to call you all sorts of names like I do BK.

Furthermore, I haven't met a single priest or bishop in the Orthodox church who believes in such things to be literally true. And I know a lot of priests. Even among their ranks, creationism isn't a popular belief. I doubt even modern Popes have suggested such a thing is true.

So you are definitely part of a fringe minority on this issue, Nikolai.

And I'll echo rah's sentiments by saying I'm not trying to be rude. But the fact is, literal creationism isn't a belief held by mainstream Christianity.

If believing in it works for you, that's okay. But you should know that doing so severely diminishes your credibility on just about every conceivable topic. This isn't my judgment alone, by the way.

[Ben Kenobi]

Would it have been okay if the baker said, 'Sorry, but my cakes are too whitely iced and delicate for you nappy-headed jigaboos' ? Claiming of course to belong to one of those fundy type Protestant sects that believes in the inherent inferiority of some of Noah's progeny... you know, like the South African Reformed Church did.

Funny how you fail to mention Mormons who actually preached and believed that. But nah, no agenda here.

Would it be right? No. Should it be legal? Absolutely.

[Sava]

Also, someone let me know if BK believes in Adam and Eve literally. I'm not reading his posts.

[Ben Kenobi]

Except if one looks at nature and human societies the world over, there are many different ways of propagating, forming unions and arranging society.

And none of them involve Gay Marriage because Gay marriage doesn't propagate. That's an argument from anthropology against your position.

Let alone the fact that the myth of 'Adam & Eve' is hardly meant to be taken literally

I see. So what part of the bible is meant to be taken literally? The part where Jesus says, "blessed are the meek"? Anything else? Oh wait, "God is Love". Meaning that love is God and I should worship my own feelings.

except by really obtuse & stupid people in losing arguments.

You don't give yourself enough credit.

Modern marriage and romance has more to do with Mediaeval courtly love and romances- themselves based on garbled Celtic legends and Islamic tales.

Yawn. Still doesn't get you to the argument that gay marriage is ok.

[Sava]

la la la la I can't hear you

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm wondering if Sister Bendy of Apartheid is at all familiar with the history of the struggle to achieve racial equality in the U.S. . When black people could not be served at the same counter as white, or order from the same hatch as whites, or drink from the same fountain, use the same schools....

That was in 1950 and 1960s. That was 50 some years ago. The only people who experienced such things are in their late 50s, 60s now. Given that we have racial equality now, why are black people doing worse? Today black students have significant education gaps between their peers, and this includes asian students (who suffer the same discrimination, fwiw), and perform much better.

A big reason for it is the fact that black people tend to have children out of wedlock. It's a one way ticket into poverty. Who forces them into this? Nobody. Why do they persist in this behaviour? Maybe you can answer that question. Is it because black people are too dumb, or is it because society itself rewards this behaviour through distribution of public benefits?

In 50 years, little has changed. Black people actually had less of a difference from white folks in 1950. Of course, back then having a child out of wedlock was frowned upon. Now it's the norm. If the only 'dad' you have in your life is absent are you as likely to do as well as a family with dad in the home? No.

I teach my students this - we can complain about our racial grievances and use them as an excuse to do poorly or we can move on and be individuals and acheive because that is what we are capable.

As for 'lack of compassion', I've experienced plenty of discrimination in my life. You either let it define you or you overcome it.

the people framing and enforcing those discriminatory laws thought of themselves as law-abiding Christians.

That was 50, 60 years ago. When they are all dead, are they going to get blamed by you as to why the black man still is doing poorly?

Even the ones who strung up black men, mutilated their genitals and then set fire to their bodies- the souvenir postcards sold aftre show happy smiling family ouitings. White family outings, of course.

Today a black man is more likely to die from another black man than he was likely to die from any cause in 1950. Is this progress?

Which part of their firmly held Christian beliefs undeprinned those laws and acts, Sister Bendy ? Would that be the 'love they neighbour' part, the 'thou shalt not kill' part, or the ideas behind the parable of the Good Samaritan ?

The part where every other conceivable race and combination does better than them? Is this racial discrimination or sloth?

[Ben Kenobi]

Do you read New Testament Greek ? If not, then what you're reading in a biblical text is a translation of what an author wrote. Also, Paul (or whoever) wrote specifically at a time and in a particular society- and many if not most same sex realtionships at that time were of the Hellenistic adult male-boy ephebe type. One has only to look at the famous case of the Emperor Hadrian and Antinous for instance. But I forget- you know all about the history fo same sex relationships down the ages....

The text explicitly refers to sodomites in the Greek. It is interesting that the old lies never stop.