The homophobic thread :>

[Seth Milner]

She took her panties down and the bitch had a dick!

You mean . . . like . . . ?

:gthumb: :gthumb:

[JTA]

I didn't know that you and Eazy-E were close enough for him to be writing songs about your life.

Eazy-E was my role model as an infant.

[Vrede too]

What happened to you since?

[JTA]

What happened to you since?

The magic of Waffle House happened.

[Vrede too]

Ciara and Russell Wilson Changed Their Wedding Venue Due to North Carolina’s Transgender Bathroom Law

Fwiw, Wilson is a devout Christian, not sure about Ciara.

[Seth Milner]

Ciara and Russell Wilson Changed Their Wedding Venue Due to North Carolina’s Transgender Bathroom Law
Everybody has personal agendas. Good way to get exposure and your name in the news I suppose.

Fwiw, Wilson is a devout Christian, not sure about Ciara.
If the Good Book is truly God's Word, I gotta go with Mr. B's assessment of this one!

From your Wikipedia link:

( Christian) Beliefs:
"There are many important differences of interpretation and opinion of the Bible and sacred tradition on which Christianity is based. Because of these irreconcilable differences in theology and a lack of consensus on the core tenets of Christianity, Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox often deny that members of certain other branches are Christians."

It's not stated what group or denomination Wilson is a member of. Probably FSM.

[rstrong]

Everybody has personal agendas.

In this case, human rights. Nothing wrong with that.

Good way to get exposure and your name in the news I suppose.

That was what the politicians were doing when they passed the bathroom law to begin with. It's all about establishing getting the bigoted inbred vote.

It works too. Until it works too well, and end up with the 2016 Republican clown car with Trump winning the nomination and Ted Cruz as the distant second.

If the Good Book is truly God's Word, I gotta go with Mr. B's assessment of this one!

The "assessment of the Good Book" you're going with is that most of the New Testament and ALL of the Old Testament are NOT "God's word."

Mr. B has stated outright that the Old Testament isn't part of Christianity. As for the New Testament, he only cherry-picks the bits that back his personal beliefs, phobias and bigotry while dismissing the rest that contradicts them. He declares one directive in Paul's Memo to the Corinthians to be sacrosanct, while utterly dismissing the next as nonsense.

[Seth Milner]

OT, NT, whatever T; regardless of his beliefs; or mine or yours for that matter, there's still that nagging little thingy about lying with the same sex and a man being effeminate. A "devout Christian" ? That dude's about as a "devout Christian" as you or I.

Mr. B has stated outright that the Old Testament isn't part of Christianity.

That's not what I read in his posts; that's what you say he said. I understood that according to his posts, the NT dealt with Jesus' time on earth, and Christianity, meaning "Christ-like", being following the idea that Jesus was the Son of God. Inasmuch as Jesus wasn't presented in the OT, I would take that to mean that Christianity wasn't present in the OT; however, being a Christian, to me, would mean accepting the Bible as a whole; but what do I know? You're the Biblical expert here, you know it all.

[neoplacebo]

Bullshit; rstrong knows almost everything, and I know the rest.

[Seth Milner]

Bullshit; rstrong knows almost everything, and I know the rest.

Don't tell him that; it'll bruise his fragile ego.

[O Really]

As QB of a Super-Bowl contending team, Wilson probably doesn't need to go out of his way just for publicity. And Seth seems to be the only person on record to question whether he's a "real" Christian. http://www.worldreligionnews.com/religi ... rch-pastor

Maybe, just maybe, he's one that supports the civil rights of people even if they aren't the same religion as his - even if, according to his religion, they're sinners?

[Seth Milner]

As QB of a Super-Bowl contending team, Wilson probably doesn't need to go out of his way just for publicity. And Seth seems to be the only person on record to question whether he's a "real" Christian. http://www.worldreligionnews.com/religi ... rch-pastor

Maybe, just maybe, he's one that supports the civil rights of people even if they aren't the same religion as his - even if, according to his religion, they're sinners?

I said nothing about his being a real Christian. If you can comprehend, according to Bible teachings and Christian beliefs, he's about as "devout" as rstrong or myself. Get it together, O Really.

[rstrong]

OT, NT, whatever T; regardless of his beliefs; or mine or yours for that matter, there's still that nagging little thingy about lying with the same sex and a man being effeminate. A "devout Christian" ? That dude's about as a "devout Christian" as you or I.

Being gay doesn't make you non-Christian any more than being a banker or allowing women to speak in your church - both of which are equally forbidden in the New Testament. Christians, er "Christians" like Mr. B simply cherry-pick the rules they like.

Mr. B has stated outright that the Old Testament isn't part of Christianity.

That's not what I read in his posts; that's what you say he said.

No, his posts speak for themselves.

He'd quote a biblical rule as sacrosanct. When someone responds by asking if he followed certain OTHER biblical rules - from the Old Testament - he'd respond with:

"You still hung up on Jewish Law? Don't forget that cotton and polyester thingy..... I thought surely you'd be smart enough to know that Christianity wasn't around back then."

He'd criticize the Koran for its passages regarding other religions. But when people pointed out that the exact same passages were in the Old Testament, he'd respond with :

What's your point? This was written under Mosiac Law due to diobedienc; long before the Grace of God absolved us from thes harsh rectrictions. Christians do not abide by this today.....

...and...

You take your opinions of the Bible from the writings of old Jewish Law; my opinions come from modern day news articles wherein many quotes from Muslims and their practices were taken.

...ignoring the fact that you can find plenty of modern day news articles with Christians advocating Old Testament practices and beliefs.

Many Christians explain their cherry-picking of Mosaic Law by claiming that it was only *partially* replaced by the New Covenant. Naturally, the bits that aren't too inconvenient are still in effect. Mr. B - depending day by day on convenience - dismissed the whole thing.

And there's also the matter of his considering a cherry-picked passage in the New Testament to be sacrosanct, while dismissing the next passage as nonsense.

You're the Biblical expert here, you know it all.

I certainly don't claim to be an expert. But I have enough of an understanding of Christianity the Bible and its history to know when someone like Mr. B is simply cherry-picking from it to back their bigotry.

[rstrong]

Bullshit; rstrong knows almost everything, and I know the rest.

Don't tell him that; it'll bruise his fragile ego.

Again, knowing more than Mr.B about the Bible doesn't take anything like expert knowledge. He'd quote a Biblical rule. Looking up and giving the actual context for the rule is easy and quick. And so he'd give a bullshit excuse to casually dismiss the context - even when it was from the same book of the same testament.

You know, the same way you dismiss facts that contradict your bigoted, homophobic, racist, misogynistic and otherwise just goddamned stupid claims.

[Seth Milner]

OT, NT, whatever T; regardless of his beliefs; or mine or yours for that matter, there's still that nagging little thingy about lying with the same sex and a man being effeminate. A "devout Christian" ? That dude's about as a "devout Christian" as you or I.

Being gay doesn't make you non-Christian any more than being a banker or allowing women to speak in your church - both of which are equally forbidden in the New Testament. Christians, er "Christians" like Mr. B simply cherry-pick the rules they like.
BUT....THERE ARE "RULES" (or Biblical Laws) . . right? Or else Mr. B and "Christians like Mr. B" wouldn't have them to cherry-pick, right?

Mr. B has stated outright that the Old Testament isn't part of Christianity.

That's not what I read in his posts; that's what you say he said.

No, his posts speak for themselves.
No, you speak for his posts.

Many Christians explain their cherry-picking of Mosaic Law by claiming that it was only *partially* replaced by the New Covenant. Naturally, the bits that aren't too inconvenient are still in effect. Mr. B - depending day by day on convenience - dismissed the whole thing.
So you're saying that ANYONE quoting scripture is cherry-picking. How convenient. Of course they're going to pick out certain scripture to reference; they're not going to pick them out of thin air! (that's cherry-picking) Again: you speak for his posts.

And there's also the matter of his considering a cherry-picked passage in the New Testament to be sacrosanct, while dismissing the next passage as nonsense.

You're the Biblical expert here, you know it all.

I certainly don't claim to be an expert.
Bullshit.

But I have enough of an understanding of Christianity the Bible and its history to know when someone like Mr. B is simply cherry-picking from it to back their bigotry.
The only time(s) I hear, or have ever heard that phrase "cherry-pick" used is when "atheists like you" berate Christians for their beliefs. When calling on their beliefs or personal principles, you and "atheists like you" label them bigots, homophobes, misogynists, or whatever else comes to your fill that void in your skulls.

That still doesn't negate the fact that the Bible, that Mr. B and "other Christians like him" follow, condemns homosexuality, effeminate men, manly women, etc. About speaking in church (preaching I assume), I take that to mean women are not to be over the man; man is to be head of his house; however, if you prefer wearing the panties in your house and your wife the jock-strap, that's your business, not mine, Mr. B's, or any of the "Christians like him". As far as this subject is concerned, I'm over my head, but you, the expert, can continue on. Vrede will be along to chime in with you in a little while as soon as his shift is ended.

[Seth Milner]

You know, the same way you dismiss facts that contradict your bigoted, homophobic, racist, misogynistic and otherwise just goddamned stupid claims.

Awwww . . . .we're getting testy, aren't we? You've still not proved where in any of my posts did I come across as bigoted, homophobic, racist, and misogynistic. Grow a pair and ante up.

As far as the "goddamned stupid" you claim, you're the best inspiration available.

Vrede can't hold a candle to you.

[JTA]

YA"LL MOTHERFUCKERS NEED JESUS!

[O Really]

You've still not proved where in any of my posts did I come across as bigoted, homophobic, racist, and misogynistic.

The intent may or may not be there, but the "come across" is totally self-evident.

[rstrong]

BUT....THERE ARE "RULES" (or Biblical Laws) . . right? Or else Mr. B and "Christians like Mr. B" wouldn't have them to cherry-pick, right?
Not in Mr. B's world. If you can simply choose the rules you like and ignore the ones you don't, they're not rules. They're not even recommendations.

No, his posts speak for themselves.
No, you speak for his posts.
That your inner-Palin/Santorum/Trump speaking: Where simply quoting someone verbatim is the worst form of dishonesty.

Granted, you're all Palin/Santorum/Trump on the outside too.

Many Christians explain their cherry-picking of Mosaic Law by claiming that it was only *partially* replaced by the New Covenant. Naturally, the bits that aren't too inconvenient are still in effect. Mr. B - depending day by day on convenience - dismissed the whole thing.
So you're saying that ANYONE quoting scripture is cherry-picking.
Not in the least. You're hallucinating again.

When someone declares oddly specific biblical passages to be sacrosanct - while dismissing the passages around them as nonsense - that's cherry-picking. And that's what Mr.B does.

The only time(s) I hear, or have ever heard that phrase "cherry-pick" used is when "atheists like you" berate Christians for their beliefs.
The only time(s) you hear, or have ever heard that phrase "cherry-pick" is when someone IS cherry-picking. Usually to support some offensive and ethically unsupportable bigoted view.

As a general rule when you hear the phrase "atheists like you", it's by some bigot encountering others - often Christians - who disagree with his bigotry and cherry-picking.

I'm not berating Christians for their beliefs here. I'm berating bigots who misrepresent Christianity to back their bigotry.

When calling on their beliefs or personal principles, you and "atheists like you" label them bigots, homophobes, misogynists, or whatever else comes to your fill that void in your skulls.
Only when the person is defending and promoting bigotry, homophobia, misogyny, racism and the rest. Christians often do this too, when encountering bigots.

If your religious beliefs or personal principles don't harm others, you're welcome to them. But there's a long history of religious beliefs and "personal principles" leading to violence and laws that harm civil rights. And others have every right to speak out when it does.

That still doesn't negate the fact that the Bible, that Mr. B and "other Christians like him" follow, condemns homosexuality, effeminate men, manly women, etc.
As Mr. B says, the Old Testament don't apply to Christianity. Only the New Covenant does. And yet.... Jesus said NOTHING against homosexuality. Given all his teachings, you'd think he'd have mentioned it.

For a thousand years - from roughly 500AD to 1500AD - the Christian church performed same-sex unions. Granted they were unions and not marriages, but they were sanctified with ceremonies very similar to heterosexual marriage ceremonies.

These days a growing number of Christian denominations support and perform same-sex marriages, including the largest Protestant denomination in the country. Even the Catholic church considers homosexual Christians to be Christians, even if they don't support same-sex marriages.

Should you fall back on Mr.B's cop-out that "they're not really Christians", then what of Christian denominations that allow contraception? Remarriage of divorcees? Shaving off your beard? Letting women speak in church? Your claim REQUIRES a lot of cherry-picking.

About speaking in church (preaching I assume), I take that to mean women are not to be over the man; man is to be head of his house;

1 Corinthians 14:34-35:

34) Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

35) And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

The rule is clear and concise. It's from the same letter as Mr.B's rule against homosexuality, 1 Corinthians 6:9. And yet he supports women speaking in his church. (And yes, there are denomination that do not allow it.)

That makes him *exactly* as un-Christian - *exactly* as "condemned by the Bible" as you put it above - as homosexuals.

[Seth Milner]

Well anyway, like I said, I'm in over my head and I claim no expertise on this subject; unlike you who claim you're not an expert, yet display enough "expertise" to claim that what the Bible teaches is in essence, bigotry and homophobia. The fact that "Jesus said nothing about homosexuality" does not mean homosexuality and effeminacy is OK simply because liberal minds thinks it is or should be. If, in fact, Jesus is God in the form of a man, that would mean that God/Jesus had already condemned what He called an "abomination", so in essence, yes, Jesus condemned "abominable" acts of man's depravity.

However, what a person does with his/her life is none of my business. I've said before: I neither support nor condemn homosexuals.
If there is a God, they will answer to Him, and from what I have read, it ain't gonna be pretty.

Now curse, spit and spew over that all you like; you ain't gonna change a damn thing.