Is Christianity bad for society?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-11-2010, 08:41 AM
RE: Is Christianity bad for society?
Quote:Jesus is especially hateful of women and gays.
I've read the gospel of Matthew a few weeks ago and the gospel of Mark the last weekend, but although there was some confusing stuff, I didn't notice anything hateful of gays. On what passages do you base this claim?

But God sure doesn't like gays, and if he's the same person as Jesus is, then Jesus and the holy spirit are against gays too?

Emperor Paradox, I'm interested in how you handle the laws of Moses, the laws Yahweh gave in the old testament. Jesus did chance some of them (like the laws of filthy foods), but he also blamed some scribes ´for annihilating´ the law ''who mocks his/her parents is to be judged to death. If you quote Paul or Peter, tell me why.

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2010, 09:37 AM
 
RE: Is Christianity bad for society?
(08-11-2010 12:56 AM)Godless Wrote:  Well that pretty much proves you have not read the book.

That and common you don't get to pull the metaphor card every time someone points out a contradiction in the bible.

The book I'm afraid is very much full of hate and Jesus is especially hateful of women and gays.

Go read the book. I mean the whole book and draw your own opinions. If that doesn't cure you go read some other "holy" books and you will soon see how the rest of us look at how silly and outdated the bible is.

Take off the glasses and examine your religion with the same eye as any other claims without historical evidence you quickly see how frail religion really is.
Actually, it was Paul that was the misogynist, not Yeshua/Jesus.
Furthermore, Jesus never spoke one word against Gays. However, he did support slavery and commanded slaves to be obedient unto their masters.
Though one must realize the Gospels were not written as if a scribe was taking dictation while walking to the right hand of the Christ, and copying every word he said.
The Bible was compiled by men who never knew a man who never existed.
That should put it into context pretty well. When the Bible was printed, "The people of the Book", the first Christians, were to receive the word from the emissaries for it. The priesthood or clergy. The first printing presses were controlled by the Church, and as a consequence the poor, who were mostly illiterate, were read to from the book, because affording their own copy in some cases was illegal. And in others, prohibitively expensive.
The early Christian faith was an oral tradition. So, in point of fact, what is today's Canonized version of the Bible, was nothing ever written, authorized, authored or literally transcribed from the mouth of Yeshu. (Hebrew "Joshua")

The New Testament is not an autograph. (i.e. original text) It is a copy of a copy of a copy. The first scribes were not professional. The text compiled by them was influenced by the politic and the religious prejudice of the time. If a Book promoted as "god's breath" was the law of the land, and it was because church and state were one (Theocracy) then the word ruled the whole person. Body, mind, soul. Under penalty of death, or otherwise. Thus, people were controlled by the word, and as such the word changed according to the political and religious flavor of the time.

That's why, when you read the Bible cover to cover, it is clearly errant and contradictory. When it looks like one hand didn't know what the other was writing, from the time of lay scribes unto the transition of professionals, it's because that's exactly what was happening. Everything was literally elected to be contained in the "canonized version" by the vote and re-affirmation of three different councils.

1.The Council of Laodicea (A.D. 363)~ this particular council accepted all of the books of the New Testament except the Book of Revelation.

2. The Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) ~ this council of chaired by the preeminent early church father and theologian, Augustine. The Council of Carthage accepted all 27 New Testament books.

3. The Council of Hippo (419 A.D.)~ this council reaffirmed the Council of Carthage.
(Source/read more)


As for Leviticus 18:22, one might consider reading that passage, normally cited as god's condemnation of homosexuality, in a different light.

Women at the time of that passages' origin, were considered by Hebrew society as second class citizens. Property of their father's first, (or any other elder male in the family in the event the father was dead), and their appointed husband/spouse, second.
They were considered unclean, at a certain time of the month. Some traditions forbid (and to this day), the man from touching the bleeding woman until after her cycle had come to an end, and she had been ritually cleansed and the sheets and clothing she wore at the time of her cycle, burned.

That being said, the passage can be read to mean laying with a man in the same manner as what was considered an unclean, second class citizen, was forbidden. An abomination. Because all Hebrew males are considered son's of god, while all females are considered help meets.

The Apostle Paul, who was a Pharisee and hated women, afforded recitation that is a daily prayer repeated to this day by many Jewish Rabbi's.
"Blessed art thou, O God, for not making me a Gentile, slave, or woman."

Therefore, Leviticus which is part of the Pentateuch, (The first five books of the Christian Bible are the 5 books of the law of Moshe ("Moses"), could be interpreted as forbidding men from having sex with unclean second class citizens, in the same way as they would have sex with son's of god; fellow men.
This is completely within reason considering the Talmud contains passages that instruct "sons of god" on how to prepare children as young as 3, (3 year old brides) for sex with adult males.
Therefore, does it make sense when pedophilia is contained in "holy writ" in the Jewish tradition, that gay male sex would be forbidden? Or rather does it stand to reason more so that when women, in those same "law books" , are able to be beaten, sold to their rapist or killed, that Leviticus would instead instruct men as to how their carnal relations are to be forbidden in enjoying women, the same way as they do each other?
Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2010, 11:04 PM
RE: Is Christianity bad for society?
I think Glassy kitty nailed what I would have said.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2010, 06:32 AM
 
RE: Is Christianity bad for society?
GK's information-laden post is a really good reason why I enjoy participating in this forum. It's a place where ideas are challenged, and ignorance is banished, to be replaced by knowledge. If christianity were to disappear magically tomorrow, I'm pretty sure something would come along to take its place. The face of ignorance can take on many forms, but the substance remains the same. Fundy flakes are all brothers and sisters under the skin. Many humans seek to be lead, rather than taking personal responsibility for making reasoned choices. Ignorance is far easier ...

If not christianity, it would be something else.
Quote this message in a reply
09-11-2010, 02:22 PM
 
RE: Is Christianity bad for society?
I agree, ignorant people often try to find someone to tell them what to do which can be shown at just about any place of work you go. I do believe thou as a society we would be far more advanced by being more accepting of knowledge rather then just saying "oh its Gods will that i not know that." However being raised in a church feel it does bring good morals, and helped make me who i am today, so for that aspect i am thankful for.

I would say as far as personal beliefs, believe what you want. If you seek knowledge, if you seek "Gods will" or if you seek just to find happiness, then do it. However do not push your beliefs upon our politics, and keep Church and the state separate *like it is supposed to be*

Now i do know this is a HUGE contradiction... because if you believe abortion is wrong because God said so your not going to want it to be ok for your country.

Well that is my 2 cents.
Quote this message in a reply
10-11-2010, 02:01 AM
RE: Is Christianity bad for society?
My morals are stronger now than when I was a theist. Many people brought up as atheists have very good senses of morality. Many serious assholes grew up in religious environments. I see no evidence that religion creates better morals. Just the opposite.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-11-2010, 01:44 PM
 
RE: Is Christianity bad for society?
(10-11-2010 02:01 AM)No J. Wrote:  My morals are stronger now than when I was a theist. Many people brought up as atheists have very good senses of morality. Many serious assholes grew up in religious environments. I see no evidence that religion creates better morals. Just the opposite.

Oh I in no way am stating one way or the other, just stating what it did for my own life. I know a lot of atheist who have great morals and i know Christans who have shitty morals (for example priest who molest kids) In no way does a church guarantee a moral compass, however i was lucky in the aspect it did help shape mine.

Another good example is if you ever worked in the food industry on a
Sunday after church.... You grow to despise a majority of the religious church crowd.
Quote this message in a reply
10-11-2010, 11:56 PM
 
RE: Is Christianity bad for society?
(08-11-2010 12:56 AM)Godless Wrote:  Well that pretty much proves you have not read the book.

That and common you don't get to pull the metaphor card every time someone points out a contradiction in the bible.

The book I'm afraid is very much full of hate and Jesus is especially hateful of women and gays.

Go read the book. I mean the whole book and draw your own opinions. If that doesn't cure you go read some other "holy" books and you will soon see how the rest of us look at how silly and outdated the bible is.

Take off the glasses and examine your religion with the same eye as any other claims without historical evidence you quickly see how frail religion really is.

I have read the book and i have found no hatred from Jesus just calls of repentance.

As for not having historical evidence have you been hiding under an atheist rock! It is and has been for some time widely accepted that the bible is mostly reliable, that Jesus lived, performed “baffling deeds” and died on the cross. The only question historians explore today about Jesus is did he rise form the dead
Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2010, 01:47 AM
RE: Is Christianity bad for society?
(10-11-2010 11:56 PM)Emperor Paradox Wrote:  As for not having historical evidence have you been hiding under an atheist rock! It is and has been for some time widely accepted that the bible is mostly reliable, that Jesus lived, performed “baffling deeds” and died on the cross. The only question historians explore today about Jesus is did he rise form the dead

Not by any true historian. There is no evidence that jesus lived, but there is evidence suggesting that he didn't exist at all. There is absolutely no evidence for any of his miracles. You are the one hiding under a rock of denial.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2010, 02:50 AM
 
RE: Is Christianity bad for society?
(11-11-2010 01:47 AM)No J. Wrote:  
(10-11-2010 11:56 PM)Emperor Paradox Wrote:  As for not having historical evidence have you been hiding under an atheist rock! It is and has been for some time widely accepted that the bible is mostly reliable, that Jesus lived, performed “baffling deeds” and died on the cross. The only question historians explore today about Jesus is did he rise form the dead

Not by any true historian. There is no evidence that jesus lived, but there is evidence suggesting that he didn't exist at all. There is absolutely no evidence for any of his miracles. You are the one hiding under a rock of denial.

So let me get this straight there are no Greco-Roman and Jewish texts that say anything about Jesus, no artefact evidence and the gospels are untrustworthy.
If so then yes I will agree with you.
If not well we have a problem.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: