Why do Fundies have such a HUGE Persecution Complex?

Page 6 of 10 [ 158 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

10 Jan 2012, 11:55 am

JakobVirgil wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

LKL wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Orwell wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Such would negate that Christ is your Lord, thus invalidating the rest.

So then it is similarly impossible for unrepentant bacon-eaters and beard-shavers to get into Heaven. At least they won't be running out of room up there anytime soon.

Oh yes, right, the whole kosher laws and appearance is so equivalent to moral issues.

It's about cleanliness, not appearance. If you were God, would you want to hang around with a bunch of people who smelled like pigs? Of course not!

It's still not equivalent to morality. The outward appearance is irrelevant if what's inside is rotten.

where you put your dick is also a cleanliness issue.
I think you have a quirk where morality only means sexual morality.
do you love your enemies or pray for them that spitefully use you?
have you sold all you have and given it to the beggars?
would you?
Do you refuse to swear oaths?
Every religious person has bits they do and swathes they don't follow
in the text. But this Gay thing is very important God said it twice.
The man upstairs said 14 times not to charge interest.
Why no constitutional amendment against bankers?

And how many times do both testaments call for caring for the poor? And yet, sh*****g on gays apparently is more important to fundies than taking care of the down and out.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

10 Jan 2012, 12:04 pm

Here is Jesse Ventura on gays in the military

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iydOup5gxbY[/youtube]

He has a good point--imagine if 95% of the men turned gay, then those of us who are die-hard hetero might find life as pleasurable in the USA as he did in the Philippines.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

10 Jan 2012, 12:05 pm

Oh, and also 1st Corinthians 6:9-10, Deuteronomy 22:5, 23:17, and the previous. You asked for citations, apparently to twist and dismiss because its not to your liking, but so long as you keep bothering to care about what the Bible has to say I will keep telling you what it says.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

10 Jan 2012, 12:08 pm

pandabear wrote:

Jesse Ventura is indeed the man!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

10 Jan 2012, 1:30 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

pandabear wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

JakobVirgil wrote:

The man upstairs said 14 times not to charge interest.
Why no constitutional amendment against bankers?

Not charging interest applies to personal loans. It does not apply to business investments where one hopes to get a return on money invested. Which leads to how Orthodox Jews and Muslims get around the "no interest" rule. Instead of lending someone money for business purposes, form a partnership with him. If the business is profitable let him buy you out at what you invested in the partnership plus half the profits which are yours by right.

ruveyn

There is a work-around to just about everything, isn't there?

Gee, listen to yourself sometime... :roll:

I think that the only crime that lacks a work-around is blaspheming the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit can even hear your thoughts, and if you even think something incorrect about his place in the trinity, then it is off to the lake of fire and sulphur for you. There is no work around. Even the Apostles' Creed and Nicene Creed are very circumspect when it comes to belief in the Holy Spirit. On the other hand, if the Pneumatomachi were correct, then it is nearly all Christians who are doomed.

In all 4 gospels, Jesus preaches vehemently against divorce. Newt Gingrich has divorced two of his wives. What is the work-around, that allows him to show his face in a Catholic church?

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

10 Jan 2012, 1:34 pm

pandabear wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

pandabear wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

JakobVirgil wrote:

The man upstairs said 14 times not to charge interest.
Why no constitutional amendment against bankers?

There is a work-around to just about everything, isn't there?

Gee, listen to yourself sometime... :roll:

Why do you even think that I care about Newt Gingrich? Because he's a republican? Do you just roll dice and decide "and now I will talk about this!"?

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

10 Jan 2012, 1:38 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

pandabear wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

pandabear wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

JakobVirgil wrote:

The man upstairs said 14 times not to charge interest.
Why no constitutional amendment against bankers?

There is a work-around to just about everything, isn't there?

Gee, listen to yourself sometime... :roll:

Why do you even think that I care about Newt Gingrich? Because he's a republican? Do you just roll dice and decide "and now I will talk about this!"?

Well, it does seem... :lol:

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

10 Jan 2012, 4:37 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

I Corinthians wrote:

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

I suppose the counter-quote comes from Ecclesiastes 8

Ecclesiastes wrote:

a man hath no better thing under the sun, than to eat, and to drink, and to be merry: for that shall abide with him of his labour the days of his life, which God giveth him under the sun.

Furthermore, Paul is now placing homosexuals and adulterers on the same level with mere fornicators. The counter-quote being

Proverbs 6:26 wrote:

A man can hire a prostitute for the price of a loaf of bread

Deuteronomy 22:5 wrote:

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

It doesn't say that they can't get into Heaven. Indeed, nothing from Deuteronomy says anything about getting into Heaven. It just says what Jewish fashions should be.

Deutonomy 23:17 wrote:

There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel.

This obviously applies only to Jews. It shuts Jewish women off from a lucrative profession, meaning that Israel has to import lots of non-Jewish prostitutes from the former USSR.

And, okay, Jews can't do anal.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

10 Jan 2012, 6:46 pm

pandabear wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

I Corinthians wrote:

I suppose the counter-quote comes from Ecclesiastes 8

Ecclesiastes wrote:

a man hath no better thing under the sun, than to eat, and to drink, and to be merry: for that shall abide with him of his labour the days of his life, which God giveth him under the sun.

Furthermore, Paul is now placing homosexuals and adulterers on the same level with mere fornicators. The counter-quote being

Proverbs 6:26 wrote:

A man can hire a prostitute for the price of a loaf of bread

Deuteronomy 22:5 wrote:

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

It doesn't say that they can't get into Heaven. Indeed, nothing from Deuteronomy says anything about getting into Heaven. It just says what Jewish fashions should be.

Deutonomy 23:17 wrote:

There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel.

Jews really can't take it up the poo chute? :lol:

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

10 Jan 2012, 8:20 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

My larger point was that the errors are so pervasive and significant that the matter reduces down to ridiculousness. There are reinterpretations that arrive at the fundamentalist's aim, but the problem is that this is not a problem of a single issue, but rather that this is the entire framework. The problem with the Bible isn't that ONE moral teaching has problems, but rather that the entire structure is rotted out to the degree that focusing on the ONE issue obscures HOW MANY issues are problems.

Okay, I hereby demand that you demonstrate the error in biblical inerrancy with SEVEN instances of problematic passages.

LOL. I know that's a joke, but the contest is pretty easily won.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

10 Jan 2012, 8:22 pm

Honestly, I am still going to have to say that 'keet is mostly dealing with a bit of a anti-fundie wank-fest. The problem with the focus of the criticisms is that they are very focused on complicated issues, and often the aim is at taking passages too literally when they don't have to be taken in that manner. It's not productive, and honestly, he probably should just call a spade a spade.

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

10 Jan 2012, 9:01 pm

But aren't Fundies supposed to take all passages literally? Or, just the anti-homosexual passages?

I did have a good w*k today, thank you very much.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

10 Jan 2012, 9:09 pm

pandabear wrote:

But aren't Fundies supposed to take all passages literally? Or, just the anti-homosexual passages?

I did have a good w*k today, thank you very much.

Fundamentalism isn't committed to any specific hermeneutic like that. In fact, some have criticized fundamentalism as lacking a hermeneutic, but rather just reasoning to a favored conclusion.

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

10 Jan 2012, 9:24 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Fundamentalism isn't committed to any specific hermeneutic like that. In fact, some have criticized fundamentalism as lacking a hermeneutic, but rather just reasoning to a favored conclusion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_literalism

Quote:

Biblical literalism (also called Biblicism or Biblical fundamentalism) is the interpretation or translation of the explicit and primary sense of words in the Bible. A literal Biblical interpretation is associated with the fundamentalist and evangelical hermeneutical approach to Scripture, and is used almost exclusively by conservative Christians....Fundamentalists and Evangelicals sometimes refer to themselves as "literalists" or Biblical literalists. Sociologists also use the term in reference to conservative Christian beliefs which include not just literalism but also inerrancy. Often the term Biblical literalism is used as a pejorative to describe or ridicule the interpretative approaches of fundamentalist or evangelical Christians..... Fundamentalists typically treat as simple history, according to its plain sense, such passages as the Genesis account of creation, the Deluge myth and Noah's ark, and the unnaturally long life-spans of the Patriarchs given in genealogies of Genesis, as well as the strict historicity of the narrative accounts of Ancient Israel, the supernatural interventions of God in history, and Jesus' miracles.

The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy makes for some fun reading:

http://65.175.91.69/Reformation_net/COR ... ldview.pdf

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

10 Jan 2012, 10:39 pm

You have to look into what is really meant by "literalism".

"The essence of this approach focuses upon the author's intent as the primary meaning of the text."

"Literal interpretation does place emphasis upon the referential aspect of the words or terms in the text. It does not, however, mean a complete denial of literary aspects, genre, or figures of speech within the text (e.g., parable, allegory, simile, or metaphor).[5] Also literalism does not necessarily lead to total and complete agreement upon one single interpretation for any given passage."

What this means is that so long as they can make an argument as to what the author "really" meant in the historical context, etc, then anything can be argued for, and there are ongoing debates within fundamentalists on whether a particular interpretation is taking the Bible literally enough.

The long and the short of it is that this stuff gets complicated quickly, just like talking about the extended Star Wars Universe, comic books, and stuff like that.

Telekon
Velociraptor

Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 411

11 Jan 2012, 1:23 am

Orwell wrote:

Telekon: Turn on ABC for the NH Republican debate going on tonight. There you can hear Gingrich and Santorum bitching about how persecuted the Catholic church is under Obama. Or check Youtube for Rick Perry's ad about the "war on religion." Or take any of your pick of right-wing bloggers. Basically, you are being ridiculous. Either you live under a rock and really aren't aware of this sentiment or you are being deliberately obtuse.[

The Catholic persecution comment never happened. Gingrich isn't a serious Christian anyway. He's been married three times (left his first wife on her death bed and cheated on his second wife with his future third wife) and he's a total narcissist in love with power. His conversion to Catholicism was a cynical attempt at reinventing himself. He's trying to change his imagine so that the Evangelical wing of the GOP will accept him, but it isn't working. Everyone knows that he's phony. The Rick Perry ad was moronic but it hasn't resonated with voters. His poll numbers have been dismal for months. The ad was a reflection of his own mentality not the voters. None of this proves anything about so-called fundies.

Page 6 of 10 [ 158 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

Jump to:

Why do Fundies have such a HUGE Persecution Complex? Post Reply New Topic

Why do Fundies have such a HUGE Persecution Complex?