Pope: Catholics should ask gay people for forgiveness

[Jon Miller]

Please read the site I provided. It actually condoned these acts.

https://www.evilbible.com

These were not descriptions of other societies. The bible is a genocidal text.

I have seen that site. It is ridiculous. More ridiculous than saying that modern 'satanists' or 'witches' directly worship satan.

JM
(You can see it by having even a limited experience with the Bible and reading the human sacrifice section.)

[kentonio]

Wow. Prejudiced much. Are you arguing that England has no history of anti-Catholicism?

Yes death cult, you're a religion centred around the hero worship of someone who deliberately got himself killed in an extremely gruesome way (which incidentally is technically suicide), and who festoon your decadent palaces of worship (built off the labour and wealth of countless generations of desperately poor indentured workers and slaves) with symbols of torture and death. Oh and of course use that symbolism and the act that led to it as a way to guilt trip countless more generations of children and adults. Sounds like a death cult to me.

LOL, it means that they are getting a better education than their peers in public schools, by an objective measure.

Considering how badly socially retarded you yourself are, I can understand where the confusion arises.

I wonder if 1 has anything to do with 2, eh?

You mean like Ethiopia, Democratic Republic of the Congo and Nigeria?

So lets recap. Kentonio rails against public funding for Catholic schools. Then turns around and says that he would strip accreditation from independent Catholic schools, crushing his own argument that it's about the government funding and not the Catholicism.

The government should not be paying for religious activities of any kind, if you want a church then pay for it yourself. If you do want the government to pay for your schools, then you should be following public policy for education in every way, which should include not trying to indoctrinate children into any particular religion. Of course if you actually cared just about educating children, that shouldn't be a problem. The fact you only want to run schools if you can also indoctrinate the kids, shows its nothing more than a mass advertising scam for you.

No, you think it should be illegal to indoctrinate children into a competing religion. You're the zealot here.

You're a moron. Not having a religion is not the same as having a competing religion. If they want to be bible bashers, let them decide that when they're old enough to make important decisions. Obviously the Catholic church has plenty of history of trying to make kids participate in adult activities however, so I can see why you struggle with this issue.

I'm a product of that system, secular education Catholic convert. You have no power here!

You grew up a protestant did you not? You do understand that's also a branch of Christianity, right?

Actually I believe in freedom of families and parents to choose for their children. I also believe that the primary obligation from education comes from parents, not the state.

I don't give a flying **** what you believe in. Children are not the property of their parents, parents are supposed to be the protectors of their children. If the most important thing to you is to brainwash your kids into your belief system, you shouldn't be allowed to have kids in the first place.

[kentonio]

God hates curiosity..

And He smote the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of the Lord even He smote of the people fifty thousand and threescore and ten men: and the people lamented, because the Lord had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter”

[Jon Miller]

Is that presented in the Bible as God's perspective or people's perspective of God's perspective? It is the latter, as God is only presented in the Bible as explaining Himself a couple of times.

Additionally, you are missing the message that the writer of that story was trying to impart, namely that God should be respected.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Have you stopped presenting yourself as a neutral observer or someone who is not fully in opposition to Christianity?

JM

[kentonio]

Is that presented in the Bible as God's perspective or people's perspective of God's perspective? It is the latter, as God is only presented in the Bible as explaining Himself a couple of times.

Additionally, you are missing the message that the writer of that story was trying to impart, namely that God should be respected.

JM

Or else he'll slaughter 50070 people to ensure that people understand?

[kentonio]

Have you stopped presenting yourself as a neutral observer or someone who is not fully in opposition to Christianity?

JM

My relationship with christianity is not as simple as just support/neutral/oppose. I disagree fundamentally with any belief system that requires people to believe ridiculous lies presented as irrefutable truths. I also disagree fundamentally with any belief system that tries to stop people questioning things, and especially any that tries to denigrate people for their race, gender, sexuality or so on. At the same time, as religions go I think christianity [b]can[/b[ be one of the less harmful ones, depending on how it is practised. That doesn't include any of the denominations that feel the need to attack people or who are happy to facilitate millions of deaths over a point of dogma, so the Catholics are immediately discounted.

I also suspect that humans need some important element of what we call religon to help them deal with the concept of death and the apparently infinity of the universe. I suspect however that we could construct a human society centred version of this, without any of the stupid superstition, supernatural nonsense and judgementalism that current religions tend to espouse.

[Giancarlo]

I have seen that site. It is ridiculous. More ridiculous than saying that modern 'satanists' or 'witches' directly worship satan.

JM
(You can see it by having even a limited experience with the Bible and reading the human sacrifice section.)

That site is not ridiculous. You cherry pick put out of the Bible. Your explanations are grossly inadequate.

[Jon Miller]

That site is not ridiculous. You cherry pick put out of the Bible. Your explanations are grossly inadequate.

It is because it is not what the people who have used the Bible as a holy book for 2000+ years understand the stories to mean or represent.

It is like you looking at some Egyptian writing and making up stories based on it, and saying that your interpretation is better than that of people who can actually read the writing and base their interpretation on what they read and what they understand of the people of the time (Through other writings/etc).

JM

[Jon Miller]

Or else he'll slaughter 50070 people to ensure that people understand?

Did you not understand my words? Maybe I should break it down for you.

God is not saying "I destroyed 50k people right there because they didn't respect me." Rather it is a person trying to make sense of a great destruction and saying "We were destroyed. Why were we destroyed? It must be because God was not with us. Why was God not with us? Because we didn't respect Him."

JM

[Jon Miller]

More modern translations give 70 men out of 50k dying and not 50,070 dying. Considering that Josephus also has 70, this is probably one of the relatively rare mistranslations of the KJV. ( http://tyndalearchive.com/scriptures...mpare/beth.htm )

It is an important reason why one shouldn't make doctrine from a single text considered independently of the rest of the Bible.

JM
(Kentonio, you certainly do seem opposed to Christianity here.)

[kentonio]

Did you not understand my words? Maybe I should break it down for you.

God is not saying "I destroyed 50k people right there because they didn't respect me." Rather it is a person trying to make sense of a great destruction and saying "We were destroyed. Why were we destroyed? It must be because God was not with us. Why was God not with us? Because we didn't respect Him."

JM

Then the LORD spoke to Moses, "Go down, warn the people, so that they do not break through to the LORD to gaze, and many of them perish.

[kentonio]

More modern translations give 70 men out of 50k dying and not 50,070 dying. Considering that Josephus also has 70, this is probably one of the relatively rare mistranslations of the KJV. ( http://tyndalearchive.com/scriptures...mpare/beth.htm )

It is an important reason why one shouldn't make doctrine from a single text considered independently of the rest of the Bible.

The original Hebrew says 50,070. The change to 70 ccame about because people asked 'How could there have been 50,070 people in this small town'. A rare occurance of people actually using common sense instead of biblical literalism. Of course they also wanted to try and filter out the absolute horror of a god murdering over 50,000 people just for the crime of curiosity, because to someone brainwashed into this stuff its easier to handle just 70 pointless murders.

(Kentonio, you certainly do seem opposed to Christianity here.)

The Old Testament is an abomination of slavery, genocide and revenge. If you consider it a book of teaching, then you are a monster quite frankly.

[Jon Miller]

The original Hebrew says 50,070. The change to 70 ccame about because people asked 'How could there have been 50,070 people in this small town'. A rare occurance of people actually using common sense instead of biblical literalism. Of course they also wanted to try and filter out the absolute horror of a god murdering over 50,000 people just for the crime of curiosity, because to someone brainwashed into this stuff its easier to handle just 70 pointless murders.

The Old Testament is an abomination of slavery, genocide and revenge. If you consider it a book of teaching, then you are a monster quite frankly.

It may be an abomination if you understand it as a direct set of directions from God (since you can then interpret it to mean anything you want). If you consider it a story of an early iron age people's relationship with God it is a book of teaching.

The 70 was also found in Josephus who wrote at ~70 AD. That is in reference to the manuscripts that our versions are based on. It is a reason to not be a "KJV was good enough for Jesus and so good enough for me" person.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Are you saying that God said "Go down, warn the people, so that they do not break through to the LORD to gaze, and many of them perish." or are you saying that God said "Go down, warn the people, so that they do not break through to the LORD to gaze"? If the first (the standard view), then it doesn't actually maintain that anyone of them perished.

Finally, if I am working at a hot stove and you come up to me and I warn you not to touch the stove and you do anyway, am I at fault or you?

In fact, if you read Exodus 19, they were wise and no one was harmed.

JM
(Finally, that is Moses interpretation of what God told him. The only things that are from God to man that wasn't through the interpretation of a man is the words of Christ and the 10 commandments. And of course, as hearers we interpret them still.)