Video: “Growing Pains” star ready to save America from rational thought
posted at 9:13 pm on September 25, 2009 by Allahpundit
It’s times like these that I wish Tony Danza were an atheist so that we could have a proper theological debate between stars of bad 80s sitcoms. After this week’s post about America’s trend towards non-religion, I figured I owed you guys some end-of-the-week comment fun at the expense of atheists, Darwinists, and all the other racist/sexist/crypto-Nazis in the Kirk Cameron cosmology. Dig in.
Brought to you by the same two guys who think bananas not only appeared on Earth in their current form, but that they are, in fact, a fruit-formed “atheists’ nightmare.” Exit question: Kids can no longer “pray in public”? What?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 17 18 19 20 Next »
oh little things like this:
Mark 7:19
For it doesn’t go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods “clean.”)
there is a difference between the ceremonial and moral law…the moral law never changes…the ceremonial law is discarded…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 2:59 PM
How does one determine the “right” way to get it?
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 2:59 PM
thats what the gay-rights movement is all about…restricted religious liberty for christians.
tell me an example of non-christian speech being restriced?? who is advocating that?
everyone is bending over fast as they can not to offend the muslims…won’t publish cartoons, etc.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 3:01 PM
Thanks but this post hardly makes up for your linking to the specific details of a child rape on the Polanski thread.
gocatholic on September 28, 2009 at 3:03 PM
But Mosaic law is not generally accepted as applying to anyone but Jews. Paul covers this in the NT. Good thing, ’cause if they had to keep Kosher we wouldn’t have Italian food. Have you ever had Kosher lasagna? Ugh.
The ten commandments, Biblically, or not a moral code; they are part of the law given to the Jews. Now, many (many, many) Christians miss this distinction. Understandable, since they match the intrinsic moral sense the Bible says man has post-Eden.
But mistaking this isn’t lying.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 3:03 PM
thats in the old testament….why don’t you ask the jews why they don’t follow it?
you said:
Your church morals call for my execution, I’m hardly a fan.
which is a total lie…newsflash there gomer…1 sin earns you hell…unless you are totally perfect, or have been forgiven via the death burial and resurrection of Jesus…thats where you are going.
truth hurts.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 3:04 PM
The difference between ceremonial and moral law is an arbitrary distinction made after the fact. God commanded the Israelites not to kill, and he also commanded them to banish their wives outside of their encampment for two weeks every time they began to menstruate. Who are you to decide that some of God’s commandments actually matter and some others do not? And on what basis do you make this distinction?
If all you’re doing is throwing out the commandments that don’t make sense to you, your morality is as non-absolute as that of any atheist (and in the process denying that “all Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness”). If you do have some objective way of judging when God was only kidding when he issued commandments categorically, I would be curious to know. Happy Yom Kippur.
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 3:05 PM
For centuries, all kinds of ways. Some better than others. Fortunately, that’s not my job.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 3:06 PM
you do realize that christians believe Jesus Himself is the Angel of the Lord..the Lord God Almighty Himself…the One who gave the OT…right??
no, He told them not to murder…else He was violating His own commandment when He told them to slaughter the amorites..for example.
I didn’t..Jesus did…didn’t you read the quote??? hmmmmm???
yeah its pretty simple..why don’t you read the NT?
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Wait. As he illustrated in the conversation, he got the doctrine wrong. That’s not the same as lying. Surely you consider the distinction important?
exception on September 28, 2009 at 3:09 PM
he didn’t get the doctrine wrong…that was a flat out lie…a vicious hateful smear.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 3:11 PM
This whole thing is idiotic, there is no point arguing about something written by men 2000 years and pretending it holds any importance or relevance for the world today.
It is simply a book outlining the beliefs of people long dead. Their beliefs are no more rational or reasonable simply because it was written down.
Equanim1ty found on September 28, 2009 at 3:15 PM
wish you would say that about darwin….
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 3:17 PM
Yes, it’s certainly part of Christianity that Jesus gets to say who the law applies to. :)
The Jewish law starting in Exodus explicitly refers to them as things Jews have to do. They aren’t given as universal morality. That’s handled elsewhere in the theology(s).
There are all kinds of weakness and flaws in those theologies, but without knowing their actual positions you’ll miss them. Just like young-earth crits of cosmology aren’t very compelling to physicists.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 3:18 PM
Err, except for the billion people or so who are involved with it to degrees mild and massive. And the large cultural extensions beyond that which have been developing for thousands of years.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 3:21 PM
If God had been kidding the whole time about the actual need to follow the commandments of “ceremonial” law, it sure was a sick joke to play on the Jews (could you imagine having to live your life without bacon?). If he hadn’t been kidding all along, then that means he changed his mind, and that’s not an acceptable conclusion for other theological reasons.
So you’re not one of the people who believes that only the King James Version is the correct version. That is comforting on one level, but it raises the question: which translation, if any, of the Bible is authoritative, and how did you come by this knowledge?
I read it. It sounds like something inserted after the fact, perhaps by a priest under the influence of the cheeseburger lobby. Even assuming that it was the exact phrase Jesus used, and even assuming that he is God, then it still only removes the dietary portion of “ceremonial” law, and not the remainder. (On a related note, if the “ceremonial” law no longer applies, why do Christians insist on practicing male genital mutilation?)
I’ve read it. Legere non credere est. If I may quote Thomas Paine again:
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 3:22 PM
I have no opinion of Darwin or evolution, i’m not a biologist, i studied geograhy instead of biology in school.
Charles Darwin and the theory of evolution has nothing to do with my atheism whatsoever. As i’ve said before i was an atheist before i even understood what the word evolution meant.
Equanim1ty found on September 28, 2009 at 3:24 PM
You’re laughable at best.
I’m not an atheist.
I’m a pagan, and proud of it. Your self righteous typing is completely wasted on me.
Spiritk9 on September 28, 2009 at 3:30 PM
Err….yeah, the would “should” was meant be in there somewhere.
It should hold no relevance or importance outside historical and anthropological study.
Equanim1ty found on September 28, 2009 at 3:32 PM
In the US, for non-religious purposes. In much of the rest of the Christian world, it isn’t practiced. There are probably sects that do consider it required. I’ve never heard of non-Jews circumsizing in a Biblical fashion. If it happens it’s certainly not common.
See, with that and the other things you are targeting things that aren’t actually doctrine.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 3:32 PM
He wasn’t kidding…the law was a tutor, basically given to show how impossible it is to follow the law…you may think that is crazy, but in a way this whole world we live in is given to show what it is like to live under sin, without God..and the result of that sin…
no, I’m not a king-james only person…but the translations are remarkably similar…there are entire books written on how the bible was put together…well, the NT anyway, we accept the jewish OT. thee is no one translation that is authoratative.
a great deal of the NT deals with this…especially the book of Romans and Hebrews…these concepts aren’t the easiest things to explain in a sentence or two….
as far as circumcision…I guess some habits are hard to break…
its not like God changed His mind…this is often charged, but the OT and NT are remarkably similar…other than the ceremonial law…much of the NT is based upon the OT…especially books like revelation…sometimes its hard for people to distinguish between what God wants, and what happens…just because the bible records something, doesn’t mean God wants it that way…like the socialism practiced by the church of Jerusalem….nowhere else…or the Israeli’s desire for a king…the Lord REALLY didn’t want that…its where we get our ‘no king but Jesus’ cry from the revolutionary war period…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 3:33 PM
whatever, you still have a god in your own image.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 3:34 PM
@right4life you did call it a judaeo-christian morality, therefore I made a assumption that you were one of those folk that liked to quote the 10 commandments. Maybe you don’t want to take that part of the morality anymore?
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 3:34 PM
I didn’t realize the 10 commandments called for the death of gays…you do realize that leviticus in particular was given for the ancient israelis??
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 3:37 PM
If what you mean by that is that I have my own idea of what “god” is in my head, then yes. If you mean that I model my idea of “god” after me, you’re sorely mistaken.
If I were to model a god after me, there wouldn’t be intolerant morons like zerobama floating around, nor would there be religious bigots running around condemning everyone to hell because they aren’t lemmings like yourself.
Spiritk9 on September 28, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Why? Christian theology doesn’t say the 10 commandments are the source of their morality is. Genesis 3 is.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Mine would be a chick. I’m not big on my image. Really hot chick.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 3:42 PM
nice, so you want to murder people like me. how fascist of you.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 3:43 PM
what a waste of 4000 years…surely a powerpoint lesson and a few note cards could have saved the millions of lost souls from this time.
Christians often tell me that they believe mankind to be inherently evil or flawed, that this is a sign from Adam, the first sin to some other believe that mankind sins because he is weak and evil. But I don’t believe mankind is evil at all. I think the majority of people are good and that religions that teach otherwise actual give people excuses to do bad things to others.
personally I think it’s likely that there are beings of a higher order than us in the universe, but I personally believe that higher level being would have (and should have) about the same concern for us as we have for plankton. Trying to do anything more than personal transcendence is most likely a wasted attempt at dogma and rhetoric.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 3:45 PM
@exception wasn’t it Paul who said if you followed part of the law you had to follow all of it?
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 3:47 PM
I think he just wishes that you never existed in the first place. There are people i wish didn’t exist however i have no desire to murder them. DUCY.
Equanim1ty found on September 28, 2009 at 3:47 PM
aww @right4life is an adorable lemming!!
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 3:48 PM
go ahead, be honest, you would like to also.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 3:56 PM
You gotta understand something about right4life.
Everyone who does not believe in his God and Doctrines is a Godless Communist who wants to abort fetuses, allow homosexuals equal rights and enact Eugenic practices and he doesn’t know which is worse; homosexuality, Abortion or Eugenics. There is no common religious ground with him. Diesm of the First Principle is an impossibility with him.
His view is completely dependent upon his Religion. The Biblical View, is his view. He is a Religious Nihilist, the only things that have any value comes from God.
He proclaims in some odd twisted fashion that allowing Homosexuals full equal civil and legal rights that it violates Christian religious freedom. Apparently he thinks Christianity has a right to dictate secular law. He is in a way a lot like a Muslim in that way.
Holger on September 28, 2009 at 4:00 PM
@right4life um no, that would be not be me, I gave up personal violence ages ago when I realized I was merely reflecting my personal disappointment and anger at being gay and being unable to ever truly earn my parents approval, onto others and hurting them in the process. I only countenance violence on the national level and only if it’s in the nations best interests. I’m a bit of an imperialist these days, I think it’s inevitable given our national history.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 4:02 PM
I’m not sure. Good chance. It’s not as clear as other stuff. Roughly, and I good chance have some of this wrong, since the first Christians were Jews obviously, it wasn’t too much of an issue for them. But they were taking this to Rome. Was Christianity an advancement of Judaism? Would Roman (and other goyim) have to become Jews to become Christians? Hebrew babies being cut on the 8th day is easy enough, but need to get adult Romans to get circumsized would be a burden. What came from it was you didn’t have to be Jewish or follow Jewish law to be Christian. So Paul got down to business.
That didn’t mean you could go around stealing, etc. According to the Bible, basic moral sense is covered in Genesis 3.
The stuff in Ex. Deut. and Leviticus is law for Jews. Sure it covers murder; most law codes do. It also covers boing stuff like hygene and cloth making. Law-stuff, not morality stuff.
It’s not the 10 commandment that says Christians can’t murder, it’s Genesis. A lot of Christians miss this. Many Christians will tell you that many Christians are wrong.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 4:06 PM
you really are a wacko.
again idiotic…everything comes from God…including satan.
they have full civil rights. allowing them a special right of marriage will severely impact religious freedom in this country…and everyone with a brain knows it.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 4:15 PM
you really are an angry, bitter, person…get some help.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 4:16 PM
Exodus 20:13
You shall not murder.
Prohibition of murder is throughout the Bible.
balkanmom2 on September 28, 2009 at 4:28 PM
As repetition. It counts the first time, and doesn’t get any more forbidden as time goes on. Cain never read Exodus.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 4:32 PM
@right4life lol I did get help, i’m super nice now! look I baked cookies… Cookies for all!! even you my little lemming
you do understand what we are talking about when we say christian nihlism, right? it’s the belief that all things stem from god, and that there is nothing else. this is interesting because if you take the scripture as absolute truth, you could make a case that even god reference’s other celestial beings with the caveat that you don’t worship them. Still I think it’s likely that if god does exist and he talked to people it’s much more likely he just stumbled upon the earth and took credit for what was already here.
@Balkanmom2 I believe exception is referring to the basic tenet that is established in Genesis, however I think that would be superseded for christians by jesus’s commandment, love your neighbor as yourself. Which would omit murder or rape as acceptable.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 4:46 PM
There is no one doctrine that is doctrine for all sects of Christianity. Circumcision, for instance, was doctrine in the sect I was raised in, as was baptism with three dunkings of the head, foot-washing at communion services and Welch’s grape juice instead of wine, and a number of other things that practitioners of most other sects of fundamentalist Protestant Christianity would think downright nutty. All of it had some Biblical basis, but the Bible can be interpreted a number of different ways.
To quote Paine again:
No group of people understands the OT better than Orthodox and Hasidic rabbis. Good luck finding one who agrees with that statement.
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 4:56 PM
That’s interesting. Did they also perform circumsisions on the 8th day?
I know a bunch of people that are Church of Christ, and I really don’t understand the grape juice thing. Forget requiring it, but how is it even permissible? I wonder if any rabbis advise on replacing wine with grape juice for a Seder.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 5:07 PM
you missed the ‘the only things that have any value comes from God’ its an idiotic statement..everything comes from God….
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 5:16 PM
actually they don’t understand it very well..otherwise they’d accept Jesus…He is the Jew’s messiah after all..Paul mentions this ‘peculiarity’ in 1 corinthians I believe…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 5:17 PM
you do realize that there are fundamental doctrines of christianity…like the Trinity, divinity of Jesus, salvation through grace, etc…that are non-negotiable…and the manner of baptism is not one of those…along with ‘grape juice or wine’ etc…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 5:18 PM
2 Corinthians 3:14
But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 5:20 PM
@right4life um and a statement you recently said…
the differences between the OT and the NT are many, but they are most stark in the differences between how you treat your enemies, in the OT complete slaughter was the norm in the NT it’s all pacifism and killing them with niceness. that’s a pretty radical shift. Not to mention opening up the religion to everyone not just the jews.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 5:22 PM
LOL!
Dude, I didn’t say that. Having you not exist before you were not aborted at us isn’t the same as murdering you, but since you offered…
Really, joking aside, I don’t know who you’re trying to convince here or why (mostly because I don’t care), but you aren’t going to ‘win’ this thread. You need to just quietly go sit in your shower and have a cup of…..no, coffee. I wasn’t gonna say a cup of STFU, but that’d be your choice, free will and all that.
Spiritk9 on September 28, 2009 at 5:23 PM
I got you pegged.
You’ve slandered people on the simple basis of accepting the Theory of Evolution as the most factually correct theory of the origin of complex life on this Planet. You’ve called them Nazis, Communists and all sorts of other bad names.
You’ve personally insulted people on the basis of not being Christian. You have made sweeping generalizations of religious and non religious people because they do not believe in your Concept of God or your Doctrines.
And you’ve argued that your Religion should have special privelages to dictate the Rights given to other people.
Holger on September 28, 2009 at 5:31 PM
@right4life if they were non-negotiable there wouldn’t be over 1600 christian denominations in the US. everyone wants to look at it their own way. I just think that any religion that splinters that much can’t have too many fundamentals.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 5:33 PM
@Zekecorlain
I originally wasn’t going to jump here but I feel I must defend my Catholic faith. Christians are not lacking fundamentals. I would agree with you if there 1600 Christian denominations of equal size with wildly differing views, but there aren’t. There are a handful of major denominations that largely share the same fundamentals (like love of fellow man, belief in Jesus’ resurrection, etc) but quibble on details such as the rite of confession. I’m not defending right4life, (who doesn’t seem to tolerate other theological views. I simply think that sometimes people like zekecorlain look down too much on Christians as primitives who will believe anything written in the bible. And people like right4life think non-Christians will go to hell by default (also wrong). Besides, theology is not based on facts. Whether you are atheist, Christian, Jew, agnostic, etc. no one can prove or disprove the existence of God, it’s a matter of faith and belief. And as long as no one hurts someone through their beliefs they should not be condemned.
SG1_Conservative on September 28, 2009 at 6:00 PM
@SG1_Conservative I’m sorry if I implied that christians were primitives, I simply believe that blind faith is irrational and leads to more problems than it could ever solve.
Your belief does affect people, whether you mean for it to or not, the majority of young gays contemplate suicide and kill themselves in above average numbers often because of their families religious views do not allow for their existence. Even in the Catholic church there are many, and have been many understandings and theologies, false popes, charismatic priests teaching odd beliefs, catholics are no more or less likely to have their own set of beliefs than any other christian or religion. It is in my opinion the fault of blind faith that cannot be questioned that is at the root of these issues. You present yourself with an impossible question and than build an elaborate system of dogma and theology around it. your church is not even the oldest ‘orthodox’, and before the orthodox their were hundreds of gnostic sects that each had their own truth.
But your right theology is not and has never been about facts, it’s about mythology and that is why it is so frustrating to hear people condemn myself and other gays for existing and complicating their dream time.
Zekecorlain on September 28, 2009 at 6:11 PM
Fortunately, they had the good sense to allow it to be done in a hospital by a physician, instead of by a clergyman.
That particular sect took the Bible passages which other sects take as an injunction toward temperance to be a flat-out prohibition against any consumption of alcohol whatsoever. They allege that Jesus turned water, not into wine, but into grape juice–that the word “wine” is half allegory, half mis-translation. (I’ve never been to a Mormon service, and I don’t even know if Mormons have any sort of commemoration of the Last Supper, but it seems like an interesting thing to research in this context.)
I have been to my share of (Reform) Seders. I doubt any rabbis advise against it: the injunction against drunkenness Christians tend to use, 1 Cor 6:19, is NT stuff. Nothing in the OT is any stronger than Robert Heinlein’s admonition to “be wary of strong drink; it can cause one to shoot at tax collectors and miss.”
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 6:21 PM
@Zekecorlain
My belief does not affect gays in that I believe what they do is there business unless they do something terrible, like some of our priests have. I will not argue that blind faith has caused much destruction over the centuries. But you should also remember that no field of human endeavor will ever even approach perfection (how do you think Milhouse got elected?) However, I think you are error in suggesting that modern, major Christian denominations do not allow for the existence of gays. It is a small, but sadly loud group who do that. Modern Catholicism is actually fairly quiet on the issue (partially due to scandal). The Catholic Church’s official position is that it’s perfectly fine to be gay, but not OK to act on it. I also question your application of “blind faith”. The only place I’ve seen true blind faith was during the ’08 election. I’m not super religious, but I go to mass every Sunday because I like the general message, and I enjoy the people there. Does this mean I have blind faith? No. Many people (including myself) question their faith at some point. When it comes to God blind faith is necessary as He can neither be proven or disproven. However, I have only one Catholic friend(and he is a friend no longer due to an unrelated issue) who does not accept the theory of evolution. It may be anecdotal, but all of my current crop of friends and family, most of whom are practicing Christianity of some sort, accept evolution, and do not reject scientific fact, but neither do they reject God. I appreciate your insight, but I think your generalizations only apply to those few who take the Bible at its most literal interpretation. Sorry for the long post, it’s been enjoyable debate :)
SG1_Conservative on September 28, 2009 at 6:37 PM
oh yes, you’re just a legend in your own mind…I’ve got you pegged to…as a wacko.
I don’t call people names merely because they beleive in darwin…but when they are darwiniacs, people who don’t mind sueing, silencing, harassing people that don’t agree with them. get it straight…if the jackboot fits there honey…
I don’t insult people because they’re not christians..you really are a liar. no surprise there.
special privileges? thats a case of projection there sonny boy…you want the gays to have special privileges, at the expense of christians…
thats why you are a fascist. along with your gay allies who want to silence christianity and criminalize it.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 6:54 PM
you never read the book of revelation right? I know this is had for you to understand..but these are 2 different dispensations…the OT was meant for a NATION….the NT is meant for the church…and Jesus did tell his disciples to buy a sword.
anyone in the OT could become a jew…witness the Ethiopian eunuch in the NT who was travelling back from Jerusalem…no doubt he was jewish…
just as in the NT anyone can become a christian.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 6:56 PM
oh I’ve already won….the arguments for evolution in this thread were rather lame…and no one even bothered to challenge my assertions about the inherent racism and eugenics in the theory of evolution…
reading is fundamental, you should learn how to sometimes..
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 6:58 PM
you do realize that different denominations consider each other christian…but not mormons, or jehovah’s witnesses for example? because they disagree with the fundamentals of the faith.
you know even Paul and Peter had disputes.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 7:03 PM
Then their families are wrong!
What doesn’t won’t or allow is sin, and homosexuality is a sin. Just like adultery is a sin, or alcoholism is a sin. ALL sin is wrong in God’s eyes, not just the majors.
I disagree with homosexuality, but I don’t shun gays, and I won’t shun them in church, as long as they acknowledge that they are sinners and ask for forgiveness.
What non-believers need to understand is this:
Don’t blame God or Jesus for the fallibility and sins of man. Man is very imperfect, the Church is imperfect, but God/Jesus is perfect.
Mr Minority on September 28, 2009 at 7:08 PM
I once had a neighbor who “knew for a fact” that Jesus drank unfermented wine. I never tried to explain to her that it wasn’t until Louis Pasteur that no one knew how to stop fermentation. Some people like my neighbor and Right4life cannot accept reality.
Pelayo on September 28, 2009 at 7:08 PM
That should be “What God doesn’t/won’t allow is sin..”
Mr Minority on September 28, 2009 at 7:10 PM
I looked a little, skipping the more liberal stuff since I’ve been to a Seder with Chinese food. Lubavichers say for people with actual difficulty with wine, it can be diluted or just grape juice if really necessary. But consult your doctor and rebbe. So they really want the wine, but one of the cool things in Jewish law is they’ll override them to protect life. Some others could learn from this (he says, glancing over at Islam).
Then I saw a halacha site that got into which rites could be done with grape juice, but that’s just the beginning. When is fresh juice needed, and when can you use juice reconstituted from concentrate. As a fan of rigor I can’t fault that.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 7:12 PM
talk about not accepting reality…how can you still worship at the alter of darwin, and his racist eugenicist theory that is nothing more than an atheist fairy tale?
fess up, you like the racism and eugenics, don’t you?
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 7:12 PM
suicide is only the fault of the person who pulls the trigger…
trying to blame others is despicable.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 7:14 PM
The allowing/disallowing of wine/alcohol in the Church is a man-made doctrinal difference between denominations.
Mr Minority on September 28, 2009 at 7:16 PM
Trying to blame others is typical for this moral relativist age.
Mr Minority on September 28, 2009 at 7:18 PM
Right. People being dicks is not particularly a theological problem.
exception on September 28, 2009 at 7:19 PM
You are arguing special privelages, I am not. I am arguing Equal Rights. You are the one arguing a soft-form of Christian dominionism. Hell, you are arguing for Dhimmi status!
This points out the danger of the Christian Right. If it hurts Christians, it needs to be outlawed, curtailed, disallowed if not sought out and destroyed.
Hey, Science is at the expense of Christianity so why don’t we outlaw it?
Christian Dominionist. If the shoe fits Cindarella, wear it.
You want everything subjugated to your Religious view. That is what Iran does. That is what Saudi Arabia does.
And the Irony is, the Christian Right is dancing to the Liberal tune.
And you make my point again. Jump to conclusions, make generalizations, ad hominem attack and demonize others as sinners, satanists, fascists, communists and other handles to discount their point without having to refute the argument.
It is also nice enough of you to misrepresent my argument by claiming I want to Silence Christianity. To quote Ghandi, Christians are so unlike Christ. Then again Ghandi was nothing but a non-Christian and therefore an Atheist and an Eugenist.
Holger on September 28, 2009 at 7:46 PM
The Old Test. shows us the fallacies of MAN and how when we are not following God, what ramifications happen. The Old Test is a story of man-made governments/religious rulers’ realms, and how MAN ruling MAN, ends in death. The Ten Commandments were given, and from that point “are written on our hearts”. The New Test is the history of Jesus, his resurrection and OUR salvation. We no longer live by “laws”, i.e. if we sin, we have to kill 3 lambs….that was done away with Christ’s death. We are spirtual-Jews; no matter where you live, or ethnicity, if you have Christ living in you, you are a Jew. The “chosen people” were once Jews, strictly as an ethnic term. But once Christ came and died, we are all Jews-spiritually.
Yes, ALOT of “religions” have it wrong…the prosperity doctrine, once-saved-always-saved doctrine, the fly-away before the Tribulation doctrine, etc. A great web site to listen to free downloads with ACTUAL BIBLE readings, is Unleavened Bread Ministries. It’s not a church/sect/group, etc. His name is David Ells and has been studying the scripture for 30 years.
Rainboskies on September 28, 2009 at 8:05 PM
Holy cow! Over 1800 comments? This is great!
Queen0fCups on September 28, 2009 at 8:06 PM
laughable when its the gays that are trying to impose a form of gay sharia law…where any action or word, or even thought, has to comply with their desires…a church in NJ was sued because they wouldn’t let a gay couple get ‘married’ on their land…a doctor in CA was sued, and lost, to a lesbian, that he did not want to inseminate. with gay marriage it would be far worse…
you know you have nothing to back up your position…there is no social good that would come from gay marriage, and religious freedom would suffer greatly in this country…and you don’t even care…you’re a fascist.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 8:13 PM
if it hurts freedom of religion, sure…but hey nice lie…no surprise from you princess.
fascist lying scum…if the ballet slipper fit…,
more lies and BS..typical fascist tactic…the big lie.
silencing christians is what the gay agenda is all about…you cannot deal with the truth…I’ve already posted an article from the heritage foundation that affirms what I say…you??? nothing…except propoganda and BS..no surprise from trash like you.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 8:15 PM
oh and science isn’t at the expense of christianity…just the atheist fairy tale known as darwinism posing as science…
but I can understand why you like darwinism..its racist and eugenicist…again if the jack-boot fits sweety pie….
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 8:17 PM
@right4life, what is your definition of darwinism, do you mean evolution or the particular social outlook of the man, himself or at least that attributed to him?
Equanim1ty found on September 28, 2009 at 8:27 PM
you cannot divorce evolution from its implications…the science is false….there is no evolution…unless you define it very narrowly as ‘micro’ evolution
and its implications are hellish…and millions have died because of this theory…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 8:30 PM
Let me attempt to answer as Right4life would: “You’re a liar, racist, and a worshipper of the hairy-god Darwin.”
Pelayo on September 28, 2009 at 8:30 PM
Can you expound on this please, explain the implications of evolution as a scientific theory as you see them. thx.
Equanim1ty found on September 28, 2009 at 8:33 PM
cyberstalker
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 8:34 PM
the first thing its done is make anyone who doubts darwin subject to being sued, silenced and harassed, like sternberg. science has now become atheism.
darwinism tolerates no god, other than darwin.
we’ve seen in history what darwinism has done..the racism, the eugenics…the gas chamber…abortion….margaret sanger was a huge fan of eugenics. ever hear of the ‘negro project’? millions have died.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 8:36 PM
You gotta be kidding, Right4 won’t even discuss Neanderthals.
Pelayo on September 28, 2009 at 8:38 PM
and this sums up the gay agenda for ‘marriage’ pretty well….
link
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 8:39 PM
you really have a ‘thang’ for me. keep dreaming.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 8:40 PM
from the article I posted..
Now, nobody gay in history has lost his assets, his job or his freedom for writing, teaching and running a business guided by his belief that marriage is a union of any two individuals who love each other. So why do gay activists support limitations on the freedom of speech, the media and religious expression for anyone who disagrees with them?
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 8:44 PM
The Jewish holiday Purim, which commemorates the story of Esther and Haman, is by some practices celebrated by–get this–becoming intoxicated to the point where one can no longer tell the difference between right and wrong. Teetotaling has no place in Judaism.
Also noteworthy: Kosher for Passover implies different things than regular Kosher-ness. Because, according to the apocryphal story of the Exodus, the Israelites had to prepare to flee Egypt before their bread had time to rise, leavened bread is not K.P., and matzoh is substituted instead (a tradition which carried over to the flat wafers served at Christian communions). Strangely, though, all manner of bread-like substances which are consumed during Passover week are made, not from uncooked dough which has not been allowed to rise, but from matzoh which has been crushed and had water added to it to form a matzoh dough. Corn/maize is also forbidden, because it plumps up when cooked, “rising” like leavened bread. Products made from maize, such as Doritos, are also disallowed, even though no obvious plumping takes place. (No word on whether all-beef Ballpark brand hot dogs are acceptable.)
Perhaps the strangest thing, though, is that the wine which is consumed must also be K.P. Wine, by definition, is fermented. How, I wondered for years, can wine be kosher for Passover? The answer: KP wine must be produced 100% start to finish by Jewish males. Jewish males must plant the vines, tend them, pick the grapes, press the grapes, store the must in casks, and then bottle the finished product. If a goy, or a Jewish female, has a hand in the process at any point, the wine is not kosher for Passover.
The mohel’s knife slipped at the bris.
Perhaps some day, after you get around to actually learning what the theory of natural selection is*, you’ll turn your attention to astrophysics and geology—neither of those fields are compatible with a literal reading of the Bible either.
*Eugenics and racism are no more a necessary outcome of biology than Marxism is a necessary outcome of the study of history (Marx came up with Marxism by studying history, but he did it wrong). Biology has, in fact, abolished the very notion of race.
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 8:46 PM
I have posted this many many times in other discussions, but not too many people reply. Which intelligent design (creation) “theory” will we teach in school? Hindu, Zoroastrian, Shinto, Jewish. Cherokee, Babylonian, or all of them, there are hundreds if not thousands of
mythstheories.How long would a science teacher last if he or she were teaching our kids that the Earth was flat? Theaching intelligent design is sort of like that.
Pelayo on September 28, 2009 at 8:51 PM
oh please, more darwiniac talking points…if you don’t agree with darwin you’re ignorant…
astophysics?? oh please the anthropic principle supports my position. geology? don’t bet on it, any more than darwinism…
oh yes lets just whitewash history…the term eugenics was coined by Darwin’s cousin Galton…
link
link
as far as racism…
anyone can say whatever, as long as they deny reality…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 8:54 PM
oops sorry wrong quote from gould…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 8:55 PM
What? Not Darwin? If one reads the context of all your comments, it was Darwin who pushed eugenics’.
Pelayo on September 28, 2009 at 8:57 PM
It’s just a scientific theory to be confirmed or denied, accepted or rejected.
Surely it’s only implication is that life on this planet evolved naturally, this doesn’t even rule out the existance of a “God” necessarily.
Whatever social outlook some individuals have adopted perhaps because of their assumptions about evolution or what they project onto it cannot change the fact that evolution is just theory. It has no motive, no intent, no social viewpoint.
Throughout time people have used Christian theology to commit countless attrocities, this is not the fault of the scriptures themselves, the blame lies squarely on those who would seek to miss-represent them or fail understand what they mean.
Those who would seek to use or have used evolution to commit or persue things like eugenics etc, are responsible for their own actions. You cannot blame a scientific theory for the assumptions or implications people draw from it.
One last point. Do you except that atheism can be divorced from a belief in evolution?, that someone can be an atheist an reject the theory of evolution.
Equanim1ty found on September 28, 2009 at 8:59 PM
Excellent. I wish I had written that.
Pelayo on September 28, 2009 at 9:02 PM
you don’t know your own theory..
uh it does…I just posted this…here it is again..
everybody knows this…this total denial of reality when it comes to darwinism shows its a religion.
evolution is racist and eugenicist at its core.
again this denial of reality…darwin can do no wrong…sigh…
see provine’s quote…
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 9:05 PM
It means all of that for r4l.
He believes there is a religion called “Darwinism”, and that it’s followers view Darwin as God/Jesus, and that the testaments “Origin of Species” and “Descent of Man” make up the infallible word of The Hairy Ape God (Darwin).
In his distorted view, we (anyone who accepts the theory of evolution) view Darwin with the save reverence that he views Jesus.
yelnats on September 28, 2009 at 9:08 PM
given the absolute refusal of darwinists to accept anything bad about darwinism…as was just demonstrated…doesn’t seem very distorted now does it?
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 9:11 PM
You do not understand that evolution is a theory and scientists are still studying it, refining it, and working out the problems. Quite unlike the “study” of creation.
Pelayo on September 28, 2009 at 9:15 PM
If someone believes that the Theory of Evolution is the best explanation we have to explain the diversity of life on earth, are they a “Darwinist”?
I’m trying to understand where you are coming from.
yelnats on September 28, 2009 at 9:16 PM
more darwiniac talking points…I understand evolution a lot better than you do obviously…and all data is interpreted to fit the theory.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 9:16 PM
yes.
right4life on September 28, 2009 at 9:17 PM
Modern biologists don’t agree with Darwin. He put forward an idea that was right on some points and wrong on some points. Scientists went where the evidence took them, and biology today is no more Darwinian than economics is Smithian or physics is Newtonian.
I never said Darwin didn’t inspire the eugenicists. I actually was told in class by one of my professors in college that Galton was a racist eugenicist. (He also coined the phrase “regression,” so he came up in an economics statistics class.) No question he was wrong. But eugenics, despite borrowing terminology from Darwin’s theories of biology, was no more scientific than was Marx’s “scientific socialism.” (It could be argued, using the same mental processes you are using now, that classical economics led by necessity to Marxism, and that all of economics should be discarded on account thereof.)
The fact that we see light from stars which are more than 10,000 light years away is but one of the many aspects of astrophysics which is irreconcilable with Young Earth Creationism. As for geology, that we find fossilized remains of tropical rainforests in Greenland is but one of the many data that leads to a plate tectonics model, and no plate tectonics model is compatible with a young earth.
You were being so civil! What happened?
hicsuget on September 28, 2009 at 9:18 PM
I asked you for your opinion not the views of William Provine, his assumptions belong only to him, they cannot be conferred upon the material from which he drew them.
You seem to be unable/unwilling to seperate a scientific theory (evolution) from the implications or assumptions individuals (even Darwin himself) choose to project onto it.
Ofcourse Darwin can do wrong, but evolution is not Darwin just as the pythagorean theorem is not pythagoras.
Equanim1ty found on September 28, 2009 at 9:21 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 17 18 19 20 Next »