This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Anonymous (User Deleted)
Pages: 1 ... 123124125 126127 ... 212
3721
« on: February 19, 2015, 05:21:55 PM »
I don't drink, because I'm not a fucking idiot.
3722
« on: February 19, 2015, 05:20:03 PM »
In my opinion, the Jedi are evil.
3723
« on: February 19, 2015, 04:32:25 PM »
The Catholic Church is also in a constant state of reform. Although painstakingly slow at times the church is able to progress and has proven so in the past (ex: Second Vatican Council)
It's perfectly reasonably to have opinions that seem contradictory to your belief yet still be an active, evolving member.
Upon what basis does the Church have? The Bible is a static document that doesn't change.
The bible can be misinterpreted or translated wrong.
Religious leaders like the pope can change previous understandings
When a religion is based around a book, changing the 'understanding' of it is a farce. The next guy could just come around and change it back. At least a social movement seeks tangible, lasting goals such as constitutional amendments, or simply the rights they are entitled to. 'Reinterpretations' do not come without sufficient grounds to do so.
3724
« on: February 19, 2015, 03:44:56 PM »
Stoning was the law at the time. "The wages of sin is death" is a common phrase you may have heard, basically meaning that from the very beginning, any of the mildest transgressions should have been met with death. The reason that all changed is because, prior to Jesus, sacrifices were made to atone. After Jesus, there's no need for them. The levitical laws were nullified long before then, though.
I've heard about Jesus nullifying stuff, but I forgot about it >.> Makes a bit more sense now, thanks. Although I think the statements in the New Testament still stand. And my point still stands, being that religious beliefs are still basically (and in some ways literally) set in stone and unchanging in modern times.
3725
« on: February 19, 2015, 03:29:45 PM »
WHATS GAME NIGHT!?
wut Tomorrow and Saturday at 7pm EST
3726
« on: February 19, 2015, 03:14:06 PM »
Bump Can I get any more confirmations before tomorrow? Pleeeeeaaasssseee? 
3727
« on: February 19, 2015, 03:11:55 PM »
I'm on my phone now, so quoting is harder.
For the church positions, elders are the unpaid, volunteer leaders of the church. They directly control the high paid positions like lead or executive pastor. I've told you what their positions are. There isn't a 1:1 correspondence to Catholicism, but a pastor is equivalent to a priest, typically.
As for the notion of God destroying another place, well you'd kind of have to read the books to get the story, but after the New Testament sin isn't reciprocated the same way.
Homosexuality is a tough issue and I think you'll see a lot of backpedaling in the next few decades. The most reasonable explanation I've heard is that some people (gay people and lesbians, particularly) are called to live in chastity. Not sure how much I agree, but the overarching idea is that sexuality is sacred and to be treated with modesty and control. Whether you accept the interpretation of Sodom and Gomorrah is non-salvific.
Huh, okay. But re: sin in the New Testament, the Bible still condemns homosexual acts. Not much has changed except for not including the stoning part, although they do mention Sodom & Gomorrah by name: For this reason God gave them up to passions of dishonor; for even their females exchanged the natural use for that which is contrary to nature, and likewise also the males, having left the natural use of the female, were inflamed by their lust for one another, males with males, committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was fitting for their error. 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. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Also, the reason for mentioning 'no reason to believe God has changed' since then was that, well, how can one simply say 'well, that was just the law at the time' as if it no longer applies today? What changed about the Bible or the faith? What basis is there to assume it's okay to abandon that law?
3728
« on: February 19, 2015, 02:55:23 PM »
racism
3729
« on: February 19, 2015, 02:31:29 PM »
That's mostly in Catholicism. My church has women leaders, as do many Protestant churches. I don't agree with Catholicismin many areas, and I think they've largely fallen into apostasy. What are their actual positions, though? I think that's key here >.> if it's just a 'poor man's priest' kind of role, that's still not equal. Several women on the board of elders, several women pastors. It's very common for women to be in those positions. See, that's what I was wondering >.> My grandparents' synagogue had a female Rabbi. It literally says they're equals and to be subservient to each other. ...Until they aren't. But... what reason do you have to believe that your evidence would somehow take precedence over mine? Other than it being convenient for your argument. Yeah, he also killed straight people. A town that's cool with people gang-raping visitors as a welcome-wagon is p
Is gang rape against men not a homosexual act, essentially? But given that the word sodomy is literally derived from Sodom, it would be unprecedented to declare that homosexuality was somehow not one of the primary reasons behind God smiting it. If he killed straight people too, it's only more reason to ban homosexual acts. I should point out that you've yet to reject the claim that there's no reason to believe God won't smite another place. There's no reason to abandon the command about stoning gays to death. God literally killed gay people. It was the law in Israel because, obviously, nobody wanted to get smitten. There's no reason to believe God changed his mind about homosexuality, and thus no reason to believe that it's suddenly okay to abandon such a law. It's common sense.
There's no reason to believe that Sodom or Gomorrah and the catastrophe that destroyed them were real, though. Jews gonna jew, ya know.
And as Turkey alluded to, homosexuality was the least damning habit of the supposed inhabitants.
There's no reason to believe anything in the Bible, you know >.> Or at least how believe it as it's explained in the Bible. Sodomy is literally named after Sodom. It's a big stretch to claim homosexual acts were not the primary reason being its destruction. That would be an unprecedented interpretation of the text that I'm not sure would withstand criticism.
3730
« on: February 19, 2015, 02:06:28 PM »
EDIT: Son of a bitch why am I screwing up the code? Hold on >.> That's mostly in Catholicism. My church has women leaders, as do many Protestant churches. I don't agree with Catholicismin many areas, and I think they've largely fallen into apostasy. What are their actual positions, though? I think that's key here >.> if it's just a 'poor man's priest' kind of role, that's still not equal. Spoiler http://www.biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/marriage-bible-verses/1 Corinthians 7:1-16New International Version (NIV) Concerning Married Life 7 Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. 3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7 I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that. 8 Now to the unmarried[a] and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion. 10 To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11 But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife. 12 To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13 And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. 15 But if the unbeliever leaves, let it be so. The brother or the sister is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. 16 How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
I don't quite see how that necessarily rejects the quotes I gave. Yeah, be nice to each other and all, but the man still gets priority. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Homosexuality is a sin in Christianity. I'm not saying it isn't. Sodom wasn't an upstanding town filled with happy, nice gay people. It was a town that was completely lost to self-indulgence and immorality, and the specific event that sparked its destruction was when the townspeople gang-raped a visitor. What I'm telling you is that it is not a commandment to kill gay people, that was just the law of the city at the time. You have to look at this through the lens of history, in which that was pretty much status quo.
God literally killed gay people. It was the law in Israel because, obviously, nobody wanted to get smitten. There's no reason to believe God changed his mind about homosexuality, and thus no reason to believe that it's suddenly okay to abandon such a law. It's common sense. It's not like the South has legal justification for stoning gay people >.>
They used to have it for lynching.
If a culture can progress, why can't a religion? After all, it's simply words written by the men of the time to reflect how society should behave.
Government has mechanisms for changing the rules. Religion doesn't.
But you see, religion does.
Heck, it's in the Islamic texts that anything found to be contradicted in a later Surah is to be struck out and replaced with the new rule.
But it's still dealing with stuff from who knows how long ago? If you didn't write the book, you're SOL if you don't like something in it. ...Versus the US Constitution, there's a very specific legal procedure to amending it that isn't dependent on digging up whatever 'literature' that was lost to the ages.
3731
« on: February 19, 2015, 01:46:47 PM »
It's not like the South has legal justification for stoning gay people >.>
They used to have it for lynching.
If a culture can progress, why can't a religion? After all, it's simply words written by the men of the time to reflect how society should behave.
Government has mechanisms for changing the rules. Religion doesn't... at least any religion that I've ever heard of.
3732
« on: February 19, 2015, 01:40:00 PM »
Being gay and a christian seems no less logical to me than being gay and living in the south.
The South isn't a religious faction >.>
So?
Do I really need to explain this? It's not like the South has legal justification for stoning gay people >.> But more importantly, where someone lives isn't as much of a choice as belief in a religion. And the South has a government with laws that change... and they've been changing fast. Unlike a religious institution, the US is a mostly secular democracy. Why are we trying to compare a region or government with religion, though?
3733
« on: February 19, 2015, 01:24:17 PM »
In the first sentence, Paul's addressing an issue Timothy was having with women being loud and disruptive in a church. In the second sentence, Paul's talking about his personal style of running a church in which male deacons instructed men, and female deacons instructed the women. That's just how it was in that day, catechism classes were separated by gender. He's telling Timothy he prefers to do so, rather than mix them. He's not saying it's wrong for women to teach, which is obviously wrong since there's overwhelming evidence of Christianity using women as teachers, and was highly progressive and egalitarian in its treatment of women as compared to the rest of society. Throughout the history of Christianity, the biggest positions were always reserved for men. They can't be priests, or cardinals, or the Pope. Men still run the show. I don't see any problem with this. There are other verses telling men to do the same thing, and submit to their spouse, too. Men and women are equal in a marriage and should both work and be faithful. Can you provide these verses? There are interesting theories here, delving into the original language it was written. One prominent theory is that the word translated into 'male' actually fits 'boy' better, and is referring to the young male servant that was typical in neighboring Mediterranean cultures, often used sexually by the master of the house. This law is telling the Israelites that they shouldn't adopt that practice. Another less specific theory is that, because homosexuality was more dominant in Mediterranean areas, and Israel was meant to remain apart of them, that they should not follow that practice.
Nothing to say about this except that it was a law of Israel at the time. It's not a commandment to put homosexuals (or anyone) to death. This particular law falls under the civil category, rather than the religious category of Israelite laws. What have you to say about Sodom and Gomorrah? You know, the town that was smitten by God for being too fabulous? 'Just the law' my ass, God literally killed people over it. The Catholic Church is also in a constant state of reform. Although painstakingly slow at times the church is able to progress and has proven so in the past (ex: Second Vatican Council)
It's perfectly reasonably to have opinions that seem contradictory to your belief yet still be an active, evolving member.
Upon what basis does the Church have? The Bible is a static document that doesn't change. Being gay and a christian seems no less logical to me than being gay and living in the south.
The South isn't a religious faction >.>
3734
« on: February 19, 2015, 11:45:49 AM »
I'm eating lunch right now, but the long and short of it is these verses don't mean what they seem to mean.
I think they're very straightforward, and I'm not sure how they could be misinterpreted.
3735
« on: February 19, 2015, 10:48:39 AM »
It was the last good Call of Duty game.
I still have fond memories of that ridiculous, over-the-top singleplayer campaign. There was no way anyone was going to follow up on that and not screw it up.
3736
« on: February 19, 2015, 10:45:13 AM »
 Wash off your ACME™ Brand Invisible Paint.
3737
« on: February 19, 2015, 10:28:38 AM »
My mother is both a Catholic and a feminist. I never understood this, because it seems like they're contradictory positions to hold. One advocates for the equal rights of women, and the other: A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. Then they can urge the younger women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God. Both ideologies seem diametrically opposed to each other. This doesn't just go for feminism, but for gay rights too: You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination. If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them. And then there's the folks who basically lie for a living giving speeches about how vaguer statements about 'love' and whatnot somehow make the above statements irrelevant. Sorry, but this isn't your shitty Star Wars canon, you can't just retcon the inconvenient parts because you feel like it. How does one hold both viewpoints without cherrypicking only the parts they support? EDIT: I forgot to mention that this isn't strictly about women's rights or gay rights and the Catholic Bible, but those were just the first ideas off the top of my head. >.>
3738
« on: February 19, 2015, 08:06:35 AM »
>bait
Are you just figuring this out about Loaf?
I don't recall seeing him here before.
He hasn't been here for a while >.> you might have missed him the first time.
3739
« on: February 19, 2015, 08:01:03 AM »
>bait
Are you just figuring this out about Loaf?
3740
« on: February 19, 2015, 07:59:10 AM »
hey guys why does the drummer look like the guy form the foo fighters?
3741
« on: February 19, 2015, 06:18:44 AM »
ayy lol it's hilarious but kinda true tbh
3742
« on: February 18, 2015, 10:46:45 PM »
I liked Heavy Rain, haven't played Beyond yet.
3743
« on: February 18, 2015, 10:10:28 PM »
Never heard this before but OMG +1
3744
« on: February 18, 2015, 09:21:25 PM »
So many maybes >.> We need more definites!
3745
« on: February 18, 2015, 08:24:56 PM »
When did he come back? >.>
3746
« on: February 18, 2015, 06:08:45 PM »
Not tonight but some time 
There's interest in another L4D2 game night so keep an eye out for that >.>
i would like to participate in this game night
yayyyyy!!!!! We'll have enough for a full lobby finally! This pleases me.
3747
« on: February 18, 2015, 06:01:53 PM »
Not tonight but some time There's interest in another L4D2 game night so keep an eye out for that >.>
3748
« on: February 18, 2015, 05:11:21 PM »
3749
« on: February 18, 2015, 04:53:28 PM »
3750
« on: February 18, 2015, 04:46:14 PM »
I personally prefer the game where you buy a better computer. You might be able to run Half Life (and 2) if you modify the Direct X settings (Enter "-dxlevel 81" or even 70 to reduce the strain from the game properties...if you have Steam), and CounterStrike Source if you keep the settings low.
Steam-independent games are probably better for your laptop considering the low RAM, so I'd check out any games made pre-2005-ish tops.
Though with that setup you won't be able to play a 1080p video without stuttering. Oh, and don't expect ANY of these to run at 60fps, more around the mid 20's if you're lucky.
This. All of this.
Pages: 1 ... 123124125 126127 ... 212
|
Show Posts
