Pope sends direct message to Ben

[kentonio]

2. I was not unaware that some Christian denominations are supporting gay marriage. But they are not driven by any valid consideration; they are merely bowing to forces from secular culture. You said that "endless confusion" was caused by Jesus not explicitly saying "oh, and gay stuff is still out." There was no confusion whatever for at least eighteen centuries; you can't blame Jesus for a phenomenon of entirely secular origin.

You mean about the same kind of timeframe where there wasnt any confusion about slavery either?

[ricketyclik]

Still doesn't address my point. Again. You're saying that it's ok to reject the bible on this one point. How then, is the bible authoritative on other points? Where do you make the cuts as to what is right and what is not?

It wasn't intended to. I was just pointing out that when you accuse people who don't take the Bible literally of not being Christian it's a pretty one-eyed view.

Personally I think of the Bible as a very large body of work written, re-written, and selectively edited over thousands of years by many different people. I prefer to think of my conscience as God's voice. You know, that little but persistent voice inside you that says "You know you're doing the wrong thing here".

I know you're not in agreement with such a notion, but I'm not asking you to be, so don't even bother asking me to believe in the Bible. I'm not even a Christian, I can just see that one could be without being a literalist.

[Ben Kenobi]

No, it's a direct argument against literalism.

Still doesn't address my point. Again. You're saying that it's ok to reject the bible on this one point. How then, is the bible authoritative on other points? Where do you make the cuts as to what is right and what is not?

You're a pretty all or nothing kinda guy, aren't you?

I had the same answer as you and faced this exact same question. Jesus isn't saying that this is a side teaching, he's arguing that our very history as people, as creation of God, that this is an intrinsic part of our nature. That is his argument in Matthew 19, when he says, "he made them male and female". When he says "cleave", he is speaking a very precise word that means a man and a woman joining together in union to form one person. He says, "Where two become one flesh". it's very clear to me that he's talking about the sexual union of a man and a woman and that this joins the two together spiritually and physically.

It is a very important passage of the bible.

[Elok]

Considering you'd just been telling me that there was no confusion amongst Christians, I think it's a fair comment. As for the OT, since when could Christians point at that for moral justification? Every time an athiest brings up the nasty stuff in there, we're told that Jesus superceded it all.

1. Not all; murder, adultery, and theft, for example, are still out. NT wins where it contradicts the OT. Slaughtering Amelakites, or whatever they were called, is out because Jesus said to forgive and love enemies. Jesus not explicitly continuing something should not be construed as Him contradicting it.
2. I was not unaware that some Christian denominations are supporting gay marriage. But they are not driven by any valid consideration; they are merely bowing to forces from secular culture. You said that "endless confusion" was caused by Jesus not explicitly saying "oh, and gay stuff is still out." There was no confusion whatever for at least eighteen centuries; you can't blame Jesus for a phenomenon of entirely secular origin.

[ricketyclik]

Which doesn't address my question. If the bible is wrong in this one point, why is the bible right elsewhere? Your statement doesn't just apply to one thing the bible says, it applies to everything the bible says. It's a direct argument for atheism, not Christianity.

No, it's a direct argument against literalism. My statement re. the Bible being wrong on one thing is just that. Mind you, I kinda like shellfish on Fridays too.

You're a pretty all or nothing kinda guy, aren't you?

[Ben Kenobi]

Because the Bible was written by people. They're not saying God's wrong, just the Bible.

Which doesn't address my question. If the bible is wrong in this one point, why is the bible right elsewhere? Your statement doesn't just apply to one thing the bible says, it applies to everything the bible says. It's a direct argument for atheism, not Christianity.

[ricketyclik]

Same. I can understand the reasoning of a professed atheist to believe that the God of Israel is crap. But a Christian? It makes me wonder why they make an exception here, and not elsewhere where they get to interject and say, "I am right and God, himself is wrong".

Because the Bible was written by people. They're not saying God's wrong, just the Bible.

[Ben Kenobi]

You do understand that 'eye for an eye' isn't actually NT teaching right? You're really outdoing yourself tonight

"You have heard it said to you"... argues that at the time, it is precisely what God taught to the Israelites - the principle of proportionality. Are we to judge Israel by the standard of Christ who came later?

[Ben Kenobi]

Too late to backpedal asshat, you already owned up to it back in the conversation about the black people mugging you (or whatever it was).

I suggest you reread that conversation because I made the exact same point there. If you're going to bring up a prior conversation with me, please do your homework first.

Yet another insight into the world of Ben. So instead of accepting the person you are when it was opened up for you, you chose to take it as a personal attack. From a professional therapist? Only you

This was a trusted family friend. I do have a therapist here and have had subsequent therapists that were both professional and competent. She was neither.

[kentonio]

Does any of this sound familiar incidentally?

You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

[kentonio]

Hmm. So when the Jews attempted passage through their lands to get to Israel, and the other 'civilization' attempted to slaughter all of them - the Jews are required to lie down and accept it? Or are they permitted to do battle with them - fight them, and impose upon them the same punishment they attempted to inflict?

You do understand that 'eye for an eye' isn't actually NT teaching right? You're really outdoing yourself tonight..

[kentonio]

Treating an entire race with caution because you were mugged by someone who was black - that is no longer pre-judice.

Now, you also seem to commit an error. Just because people in general can and do act this way, you're assuming that I personally agree with doing this. I don't. I think it is irrational myself.

Too late to backpedal asshat, you already owned up to it back in the conversation about the black people mugging you (or whatever it was).

As if therapists themselves are immune from these actions too. Yes, I've seen a therapist. I had one who could have been a carbon copy of you. The most unhelpful and worthless therapist ever that, moreover, I had a contract where I was paying them. For months.

Do you really want to ask me how that went down?

I will say, she taught me an excellent lesson into the methods that you guys use to try to destroy someone. It was good to see gloves off in an environment where she felt immune and secure without the usual shibboleths.

Yet another insight into the world of Ben. So instead of accepting the person you are when it was opened up for you, you chose to take it as a personal attack. From a professional therapist? Only you..

[kentonio]

I didn't say they're un-Christian. Just that neither they, nor any other denomination, has any conceivable ground to stand on here. It's very nearly the theological equivalent of a perpetual-motion machine. They did not think, "hey, the OT says no, Paul says no, dozens of generations of earlier Christians have unequivocally said no, but Jesus did not specifically say no so we'll say maybe. The overwhelming pressure from secular Western society at this exact moment is purely coincidental."

Considering you'd just been telling me that there was no confusion amongst Christians, I think it's a fair comment. As for the OT, since when could Christians point at that for moral justification? Every time an athiest brings up the nasty stuff in there, we're told that Jesus superceded it all.

[Ben Kenobi]

I think all those are wrong, but I can at least see how, by taking certain verses from Scripture or aspects of traditional Church life and blowing them way out of proportion, possibly ignoring some inconvenient obstructions, they might get there. Here, they are doing a complete and total 180 on nearly two thousand years of teaching, and if there's anything in a legitimate source to back them up, I'm curious how they dug it up when everybody who tried it before them only had spin and bluff.

Same. I can understand the reasoning of a professed atheist to believe that the God of Israel is crap. But a Christian? It makes me wonder why they make an exception here, and not elsewhere where they get to interject and say, "I am right and God, himself is wrong".

[Elok]

I mean, this is not like Predestination, or the Rapture, or the Immaculate Conception. I think all those are wrong, but I can at least see how, by taking certain verses from Scripture or aspects of traditional Church life and blowing them way out of proportion, possibly ignoring some inconvenient obstructions, they might get there. Here, they are doing a complete and total 180 on nearly two thousand years of teaching, and if there's anything in a legitimate source to back them up, I'm curious how they dug it up when everybody who tried it before them only had spin and bluff.