West Wing. Martin Sheen is a badass.. I clout say homosexuality is an Yes' it .... l abomination on President. 1 wanted tomasc you a couple of The Ernie thoes.  dumb bitch
Upload
Login or register

West Wing

Click to block a category:GamingPoliticsNewsComicsAnimeOther
 
West Wing. Martin Sheen is a badass.. I clout say homosexuality is an Yes' it .... l abomination on President. 1 wanted tomasc you a couple of The Ernie thoes.

Martin Sheen is a badass.

Tags: dumb | bitch
I clout say homosexuality is an Yes' it .... l
abomination on President. 1 wanted tomasc you a couple of
The Ernie thoes. questions while i had you here.
While thinning about that,
we last: anothere
l' m in 'eidur' iiy
youngest daughter one slave
Exodus . 71
moee. iter.. 2/ iri. iiss,
would a good her be?
working an the , Am I morally obligated have to be together to atone
Exodus 35.: 2 clearly gays he; to lull him myself. brol_ her for pla_ r_ itarim
should be put to death or Ia it to call the police? '. we '?
tant burn my Jolla- in a‘ aaq' aal
family gatherer's for wearier‘
ii?"" made from two glittering
threads?
Think about o, sugestions,
would you,
...
+743
Views: 28763 Submitted: 04/12/2013
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (175)
[ 175 comments ]
Anonymous comments allowed.
asd
#5 - draezeth
-30 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #8 to #5 - noblexfenrir
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Jesus also says to kill anyone who doesn't follow him. So I honestly wouldn't take anyone from the NT as seriously as the old.
User avatar #57 to #8 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Got a reference for that?
User avatar #60 to #57 - noblexfenrir
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Luke 19-25 I believe. Give or take a few lines.
User avatar #61 to #60 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
What chapter?
User avatar #62 to #61 - noblexfenrir
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
My bad mate, 19. Line 25 I believe is the one I'm referring to but it could be either 26 or 27.
User avatar #63 to #62 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
27: "However, these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me."

Jesus, here, explicitly uses the word 'enemies', not 'unbelievers'. Furthermore, this is spoken in a parable, meaning it is metaphorical. According to the annotations of the Bible I use, Jesus here is referring to the Jews who refuse to believe, that they will perish.
User avatar #64 to #63 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Which they did, in Matthew 22:7.
User avatar #69 to #63 - noblexfenrir
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Yes however he is specifically talking about god in this section, he isn't giving metaphoric reasoning or traits, he is giving a direct message. I hardly see how that can be seen as metaphorical.

Also are we really going to conflict over "enemy" and "non-believer" when his main description of his enemies is those "who did not want me to reign over them".

And yes this did have meaning for events later, but this wasn't used in that way, this was a general parable and simply could be applied afterwards.
User avatar #71 to #69 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Parables are metaphorical. This was part of a parable.
User avatar #73 to #71 - noblexfenrir
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Yes, the parable is meant to be metaphorical, the attributes of those involved aren't.

If I tell you that a man is so crazy he'd kill a woman for 10 dollars, the tale is false to get a point across, but the characteristics of the man aren't (and really can't be) metaphorical.
User avatar #74 to #73 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
But the man in the parable is simply a slaveowner, not the Lord.
User avatar #80 to #74 - noblexfenrir
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
In the section of Luke I was referring to, he is referencing and talking about god.
User avatar #120 to #80 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
You might want to re-read it. It's a parable representing god, but not god himself.
User avatar #148 to #120 - noblexfenrir
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
So you're implying that a parable directed at representing a characteristic of god and his attributes, doesn't represent god or his attributes?.
User avatar #152 to #148 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/14/2013) [-]
Not at all. I think it does, just metaphorically.
User avatar #153 to #152 - noblexfenrir
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(04/14/2013) [-]
How can an attribute be metaphorical? You do realize you're making no sense right?
User avatar #154 to #153 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/14/2013) [-]
No, it makes perfect sense and you're refusing to understand my view because it doesn't agree with yours. And don't bother denying that, it's subconscious. It's happened to me before, too.

I should also point out that the point of the parable is not that the master said "KILL THE ENEMIES", it's the fact that the enemies will die. And the whole investment thing. In fact, the last bit is more of a prophecy than anything else.
User avatar #6 to #5 - BERTMGERT
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
its the greatest show on earth, called the West Wing
#19 to #5 - anon id: 6d9c5958
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Didnt jesus say the old testament still counts?
User avatar #54 to #19 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Until his death, yes.
#24 to #5 - anon id: b5afa923
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Where does it say any darn thing about homosexuality in the New Testament? I'll trust you if you can source me on that. Jesus said the Old Testament still counts and he is not coming to change it, but he definitely does not specify that homosecks is a sin.
User avatar #53 to #24 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Actually, he said that it would be abolished when all is accomplished, referring to his death on the cross.

But anyways, to answer your questions:
Romans 1:26-27
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
1 Timothy 1:9-10
User avatar #31 to #5 - dragondubobski
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
I think it's from the show scandal. the show sucks though, horrible montages, bad writing, terrible acting and the music sucks. the literally did nothing right
#33 to #5 - anon id: 373fc161
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
The title says the goddamned name of the show.
User avatar #52 to #33 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Ah.
#39 to #5 - anon id: 9164a205
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
The ten commandments are from the OT. And where the **** did Jesus ever mention homosexuality?
User avatar #51 to #39 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Jesus never did, but Paul does, in Romans and I believe one of the Corinthians.
User avatar #56 to #51 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
And 1 Timothy.
User avatar #7 to #5 - ironsoul
Reply +56 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
The bible mentions shrimp as an abomination 4 times more often than homosexuality, and I have yet to see protesters boycotting a red lobster.
User avatar #22 to #7 - huszti
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
************ is death
************ is heresy
#68 to #7 - anon id: 1e3c6cd8
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Anyway, like I was sayin', shrimp is the fruit of the sea. You can barbecue it, boil it, broil it, bake it, saute it. Dey's uh, shrimp-kabobs, shrimp creole, shrimp gumbo. Pan fried, deep fried, stir-fried. There's pineapple shrimp, lemon shrimp, coconut shrimp, pepper shrimp, shrimp soup, shrimp stew, shrimp salad, shrimp and potatoes, shrimp burger, shrimp sandwich. That- that's about it.
#83 to #68 - shinigamizak
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
#46 to #7 - DanLacasky
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
#66 to #46 - anon id: 1e3c6cd8
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
I would so eat him...anyone have any melted butter Ill share the crab
#12 to #7 - anon id: 6cdcab61
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
They should. Shellfish are disgusting.
#76 to #12 - frysandaburger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
No... Goblin sharks are disgusting.
User avatar #55 to #12 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
I love shrimp.
User avatar #9 - proudnerd
Reply -23 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
So many people mess this up whole issue up. The old laws laid out in the old testament for the Jews do not apply to Christians. But there are a few new testament verses that forbid homosexuality, 1 Corinithians6:9 is one of them, for example.
#28 to #9 - firael
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
So you dont believe in adam and eve either?
User avatar #85 to #9 - zzforrest
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Dude, paul wrote that.
He never loved anybody, not even women, and never once felt any lust or love.
So yeah take your relationship advice from him.
#26 to #9 - anon id: b5afa923
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Corinthians is written by Apostle Paul who also forbid women to speak in public affairs. "But the times were different" sure, but then homosexuality is not a problem either. You can't pick and choose what you agree with and what you don't want to agree with.
User avatar #37 to #26 - gatorade
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
It's really funny that Paul wrote that. I bet you any of the Apostles that were around Mary would've written otherwise.

If only Jesus wrote the Bible.
User avatar #165 to #9 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/14/2013) [-]
You deserve thumbs up.
User avatar #18 to #9 - cjcasi
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV) Clearly the Old Testament is to be abided by until the end of human existence itself. None other then Jesus said so.




Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)


ffs jesus was a jew! and if the jews had believed he truly was messiah there wouldnt even be a new testamente, just a updated old testamente



User avatar #11 to #9 - luidias
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
if you're going by corinthians 6:9, then where are the protestors and picketers against cheating wives and alcoholics?
User avatar #10 to #9 - chrolt
Reply +26 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
So the word of god only applies when it's the newest word of god?

Did Jesus say something about that or do you/they just asume that's how it is?

I honestly don't know.
#79 to #10 - anon id: 8f96256c
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Jumping in here to clarify what proudnerd said up there. The main difference between the old and new testament is the law of Moses, which was laid out by Christ, to Abraham while his people traveled from slavery, through the wilderness. The law of Moses was laid out as a lesser law, being characterized by many strict laws. The reason the Law of Moses was laid out, instead of the fullness of the law, (Love thy neighbor, etc.) is because the people of Moses were incredibly prone to returning to sin and idolatry. Now, fulfill this incomplete law and establish the full law, Christ was born, lived his life as an example for us, and fulfilled the atonement, which fulfilled the Law of Moses. Something that most people don't know about the law of Moses was that it was made with an expiration date, or the time that Christ would come. During Christ's life, he laid out the fullness of the law, which is based upon the principle of love. Not going to continue any argument here, just clarifying.
#16 to #10 - zombiebacon
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
I feel that a lot of people don't know what a Christian is. A Christian is a follower of Jesus Christ, not the Jewish law from thousands of years ago. We follow what Jesus taught. He taught people to follow that laws of God, which are the Ten Commandments. The other laws that Jews followed in the Old Testament were laws set up by the Rabbis and other temple leaders. From what I know, the only laws that God set in place were the Ten Commandments, not laws saying something like you can't wear clothes of two fabrics.   
Then again, I could be putting words into someone else's mouth. If I am, just tell me.
I feel that a lot of people don't know what a Christian is. A Christian is a follower of Jesus Christ, not the Jewish law from thousands of years ago. We follow what Jesus taught. He taught people to follow that laws of God, which are the Ten Commandments. The other laws that Jews followed in the Old Testament were laws set up by the Rabbis and other temple leaders. From what I know, the only laws that God set in place were the Ten Commandments, not laws saying something like you can't wear clothes of two fabrics.
Then again, I could be putting words into someone else's mouth. If I am, just tell me.
#15 to #10 - anon id: 8e975331
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
This is one of the verses that support the though that the old law is not for Christians.

Ephesians 2:15 "by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, "

#13 to #10 - anon id: 1d6bafb0
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
The old laws still apply. Any christian denying that has not read the bible.

Matthew 5:17-18 - “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."
#14 - andovaredoras
Reply +22 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
I'm still surprised people nowadays actually manage to....follow a book... thats like grabbing a random book from your bookshelf and saying  ''hey, from now on, i will live my life as the hero in this book did'.' (*dies 10min later*)   
   
It's rather sad and pathetic actually.
I'm still surprised people nowadays actually manage to....follow a book... thats like grabbing a random book from your bookshelf and saying ''hey, from now on, i will live my life as the hero in this book did'.' (*dies 10min later*)

It's rather sad and pathetic actually.
User avatar #17 to #14 - payseht
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
I live my life according to the Superman comics
#21 to #17 - teddysbawz
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Dude I've been saying this for years. If we followed the moral teachings of superheroes the world would be a better place.
(Pic slightly related but also because I like chemistry)
User avatar #27 to #21 - elyiia
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
I dunno man, even superheroes can be dicks at times.
User avatar #23 to #21 - scaratel
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Especially Iron man. Get rich, make awesome suit, save the world, have sex with Gwyneth Paltrow.
#102 to #23 - lambslider
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
You forgot being a raging alcoholic at times.
#29 to #14 - tyraxio
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Hmm. I'm a Buddhist, and I try my best to follow the writings of Siddharta Gautama, because I believe that he found the meaning of life, and one of the ways to find it as well, is to follow his "procedures". I don't believe the idea in itself of following a book (or in my case, more like one persons advice), I think the problem is what book you are following. I mean, as one of the other people posted, take a comic, for example. Living your life after a comic does not mean you should jump off a building hoping to fly, it means you should take the advice the hero gives you ("BE YOURSELF! FIGHT EVIL!" etc.).   
   
The thing about the Bible (rather than a comic, which I actually think would be more wise to follow than the Bible, Torah or Qu'ran) is that it is written as a "guideline" or "law" to a society which is so outdated. It's in a time where homosexuality had to be forbidden, because otherwise there might not be offspring enough to make a new generation. It's from a society where they realised certain kinds of meat can be dangerous if something is done wrong in the preparation. It's just not for today.    
   
Now, the difference about the Bible and the Buddhist scriptures is that only the parts of the New Testament including Jesus is actually about morals. The entire Law of Moses is about having a functional society, not about treating other people with respect. The Buddhist scriptures are all about morals, and about finding peace with yourself. Buddhism does not offer any advice for how to run a Buddhist society (although Emperor Ashoka did it in the later part of his life) it only teaches how to feel about yourself, how to find true happiness, not just living after instant gratification, and how to treat other people so that you do not hurt them.   
   
So again, it is not pathetic to follow a book (true, it is pathetic to follow it blindly without evaluating what you're reading); it all depends on the book you have chosen to lead you. We all look wisdom, and we should.
Hmm. I'm a Buddhist, and I try my best to follow the writings of Siddharta Gautama, because I believe that he found the meaning of life, and one of the ways to find it as well, is to follow his "procedures". I don't believe the idea in itself of following a book (or in my case, more like one persons advice), I think the problem is what book you are following. I mean, as one of the other people posted, take a comic, for example. Living your life after a comic does not mean you should jump off a building hoping to fly, it means you should take the advice the hero gives you ("BE YOURSELF! FIGHT EVIL!" etc.).

The thing about the Bible (rather than a comic, which I actually think would be more wise to follow than the Bible, Torah or Qu'ran) is that it is written as a "guideline" or "law" to a society which is so outdated. It's in a time where homosexuality had to be forbidden, because otherwise there might not be offspring enough to make a new generation. It's from a society where they realised certain kinds of meat can be dangerous if something is done wrong in the preparation. It's just not for today.

Now, the difference about the Bible and the Buddhist scriptures is that only the parts of the New Testament including Jesus is actually about morals. The entire Law of Moses is about having a functional society, not about treating other people with respect. The Buddhist scriptures are all about morals, and about finding peace with yourself. Buddhism does not offer any advice for how to run a Buddhist society (although Emperor Ashoka did it in the later part of his life) it only teaches how to feel about yourself, how to find true happiness, not just living after instant gratification, and how to treat other people so that you do not hurt them.

So again, it is not pathetic to follow a book (true, it is pathetic to follow it blindly without evaluating what you're reading); it all depends on the book you have chosen to lead you. We all look wisdom, and we should.
#87 to #29 - anon id: 3cf4368e
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
that sounds like everything about buddhism wass just great ... just like one dalai lama several hundred years ago that put the skin of condemned criminals on his drums.
#88 to #87 - tyraxio
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Buddhism is great, that Lama was just a bad one. Also, if my memory serves me right, the whole Dalai Lama institution was started by the Mongols who were pretty brutal.
#58 - felixjarl
Reply +20 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
User avatar #159 to #58 - draezeth
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/14/2013) [-]
How to get thumbs on FJ:

Step 1: Post above image.
Step 2: Gain undeserved thumbs.
User avatar #98 to #58 - mynameisfoo
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
except, you know, spider man was made for entertainment purposes, not to be a bloody religious doctrine. we know that spider man isn't real, believing God depends on one's belief
User avatar #158 to #98 - draezeth
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/14/2013) [-]
YES! SOMEONE GETS IT!
#134 to #98 - xmattx
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
belief in something doesnt make it real.
User avatar #150 to #134 - mynameisfoo
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
I didn't say it does, I'm just saying one thing is something that we have no way of knowing if it's real or not besides how we interpret life and events or what we believe and another was made solely for entertainment and is obviously false
#169 to #150 - xmattx
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(04/14/2013) [-]
You're going off-point. The argument was that spiderman books give the same amount of evidence for spiderman as the bible gives for god. It's irrelevant what the original purpose of each book is, the fact is that as they stand, they each provide the same evidence for their subject matter. At least spiderman books don't contradict themselves as much as the bible does. I'm also getting sick of factual comments being thumbed down on this site.
#82 to #58 - shinigamizak
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
#77 - lambocj
Reply +18 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
I really wish we could just decide to be good people instead of using the bible for hate/prejudice/unequal laws/etc.
I really wish we could just decide to be good people instead of using the bible for hate/prejudice/unequal laws/etc.
User avatar #91 to #77 - kwanzalord
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
fun fact: More lives have been taken and more wars have been fought due to religion than anything else. People may refute this by saying "greed" is the number one cause.

It's true, but religion has been a front for greed as well....basically religion is fueled by greed and blind devotion.
#114 to #91 - lambslider
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
The crux of it is that religion makes people feel safe in the knowledge that death isn't the end for them. It brings people together and creates communities for those who may otherwise have connection to the outside world. There will always be someone who will manipulate the ignorant through religion but to say its an evil concept is rather narrow minded. To me it falls under the same principal as "guns don't kill people, people do."
User avatar #117 to #114 - kwanzalord
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
No, it's actually a decent concept.
In fact, buddhism (though it falls more under a philosophy) probably has been the most successful in keeping peace.

However, I honestly believe that if something like religion is needed to keep people in line, those people have no hope. You need a almighty being to scare you, so you behave.
User avatar #99 to #91 - sirbutterballs
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
It's more like people use religion to start wars with people they don't like. You're not supposed to kill anyone because of their beliefs, that's a sin. Don't blame religion blame the person.
User avatar #103 to #99 - kwanzalord
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
You are exactly right.
The problem is due to human nature, religion will be twisted and shaped to their needs.
People can't go around pointing fingers at each person that does something wrong, so the whole image of religion will be blamed instead.

And those who do something wrong in the name of religion are not held accountable by others of the same religion. so once again, religion is to blame, religion is bad
User avatar #107 to #103 - sirbutterballs
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
The thing is, it's not meant to be. It's supposed to bring people together not use it to squander over petty details. In my opinion, it would be better if we simply said 'We're going to kill you and you're people because we can and want your land and resources.' That's the problem with humanity, too many lies.
User avatar #108 to #107 - kwanzalord
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
and what better way to say more lies than religion.

sad truth
User avatar #111 to #108 - sirbutterballs
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
...Politics
User avatar #112 to #111 - kwanzalord
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
problem with politics is that you don't get as much blind devotion compared to religion.
People actually do question stuff
#116 to #112 - sirbutterballs
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Whatevs, everyone's entitled to their opinion. I'll just be sitin' here doin' my own thing. Interesting conversation kwanzalord, it was nice meeting you.
User avatar #118 to #116 - kwanzalord
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
you as well
#123 to #91 - anon id: 48742e31
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
except for the fact that almost all wars have been fought for political or economic reasons
(name me one war started for religious reasons and i can tell you how it was really started for political or economic reasons)
User avatar #126 to #123 - kwanzalord
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
1) you must have not understood anything I wrote in the previous post
2) you're anonymous
3) the crusades

come back when you're not anonymous
User avatar #128 to #126 - byposted
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
He is right, most wars with a religious front have been fought for economic reasons. It is not the other way around. The crusades, if you would have actually studied them, happened because of Muslim conquests. The European Christians saw this, and wanted to repel them. The Muslims were invading European lands for economic reasons, mind you.

Dogma will not die with religion, which is something you libtards can't seem to get. Just look at the invasion of Iraq. It was perpetuated under the guise of democracy; "Operation Iraqi Freedom."
User avatar #130 to #128 - kwanzalord
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
welcome from being anonymous.

also to you:
if you actually read and understood my post, you would have seen. "religion has been a front for greed " Which implies that economic and political reasons were the behind it all but religion was what was used to get it all in motion.

There may have been greed involved, but the "holy land" was still a large part of the war.
#142 to #130 - anon id: 48742e31
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
that guy isnt me
and now that youve explained your post, i feel that you could have worded it better
User avatar #135 to #130 - byposted
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Religion has been a front for greed in so far as it is one of the ways of showing it. I disagree with you placing a negative connotation on religion because it is human to show blind devotion to your country and die for it, a virtue which is also vice depending on your perspective.

Many people in the invading American armies believed that Saddam was a baby murderer and an oppressor.

I am not the one you were responding to before, actually.
User avatar #78 to #77 - monkeysniper
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
That's why i hate religion, it divides people, imagine if people got past religion, ethnicity, age, everything and managed to work together for once.
#84 to #77 - tehphire
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
That's an awesome gif.
User avatar #34 - philliyoMLB
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Holy ****, do people not understand the difference between Christians and Jews? Christians tend to ignore the old testament because in the new testament, Jesus was brought down to nullify the old testament and to bring in new laws, that is the whole point of the new testament. The Jews of course don't believe that the coming of the Messiah has already passed therefore they have no new testament to nullify the old one. Not siding with gay marriage here, nor am I going against it. But it just annoys me when people post such ignorant things.
User avatar #36 to #34 - gatorade
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
You're right. Thank you for not being ignorant. :D

#75 to #34 - numbersinmyname
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
actually that is not really accurate at all.
Christians still have to follow old testament, and I have no idea where you got your statements from. prolly some vocal stupid jew disliking christian.
"Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
This is the quote used by a large amount of chritians and catholics, and the consensus on the interpretation is that they must also follow the old testament. Obviously religion is a thing where you can make up any interpretation and you want, so you have all kinds of views on whether the old testament should count. It isn't wrong to bring up old testament quotes. There is also another quote somewhere that says all scripture is useful or something like that.
User avatar #161 to #75 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/14/2013) [-]
Also, you're thinking of 2 Timothy 3:16-17, for future reference.

'All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching. For conviction, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work.'

When you take into consideration the possibility that the Old Testament is a sort of 'metaphorical mirror' of our lives today (a view I take), it still makes sense, even without the Old Testament laws being obeyed.
User avatar #160 to #75 - draezeth
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/14/2013) [-]
And fulfill them, he did! The Pharisees couldn't convict him of anything because he hadn't broken any of their laws. However, it was not Jesus' birth or teachings that changed things (as many Christians claim), it was his death. After he died, the laws of the Old were replaced with the laws of the New.

I don't know where you get your sources from, but the VAST majority of Christians don't follow the Old Testament at all, and many of those who do only study it to find metaphors for New Testament Christians (I'm part of this group).

And Catholics? You mean the people who said Jesus died on chocolate egg-laying rabbit day, better known as Ishtar? The ones who mercilessly slaughtered the followers of Luther because they prevented the Catholics from making money? The ones who still claim that Latin is the Holy language, despite it never being mentioned in the Bible? I don't take a word they say seriously.
#40 to #34 - theXsjados
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Does it really matter which testament it is from? In the end the fact that the old testament was nullified just goes to show that time changes things; things like what is morally right and wrong and the bible shouldn't be taken as a guide written in stone.

The old testament was written and at one point of time it too was taken seriously; and now it is not.

And finally it comes down to what religion the woman in the content follows; judging her reaction the verses he is quoting are relevant.
User avatar #48 to #40 - philliyoMLB
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Like I said, I'm not taking sides. I just hate when people take the old testament against christians, when Christians are NOT supposed to follow it either.
#70 - tazze
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
fun fact: Martin Sheen hates the Illusive Man, even though he voices him
User avatar #95 to #70 - bobbybeats
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Fun fact: Martin sheen has been arrested more than Charlie sheen,
User avatar #1 - dracolegacy
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(04/12/2013) [-]
User avatar #59 - williamweatherford
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
Reading the comments, watching the news, hearing friends and family talk about the issue of gay marriage... it's just disappointing and pointless.

Jesus Christ would've been friends with gays. He was able to look past whatever may or may not be considered sin. And He didn't give one **** what anyone thought about that, nor did He give a **** about keeping the old laws.

He was more concerned with actually bringing people to Him; He cared about their relationship with God, not their relationships with others. And I don't think He would care if gays could legally marry or raise children. All that would matter to Him is people's salvation.

So there. My opinion: BOTH sides of the gay rights debate can shut the **** up, especially the Christians.
User avatar #113 to #59 - danniegurl
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
www.esquire.com/features/best-and-brightest-2009/shane-claiborne-1209#ixzz2Ofw8Up9s

I really like this article.
I mean, Jesus wouldn't just not hate gays, or prostitutes, or whoever. He would be friends with them, and show how God has made life good. He would love us all, regardless of our sins.
That's what really annoys me about some Christians. They say gay marriage shouldn't be allowed because it's a sin, but EVERYONE sins and all sin is seen as equal in God's eyes-- as evil.
So, instead of embracing the sinners and showing how God has made a difference in their lives, they condemn them and push them even further away from God than they ever would have been.
User avatar #138 to #113 - williamweatherford
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
"The Bible that I read says that God did not send Jesus to condemn the world but to save it... it was because "God so loved the world." That is the God I know, and I long for others to know."

That is a great line. Thanks for sharing this article!
User avatar #139 to #138 - danniegurl
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
no problem!
User avatar #20 - supamonkey
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(04/13/2013) [-]
I'm surprised by the fact that people can extract any meaning from the bible considering it doesn't really follow modern syntax or grammar and also considering that a lot of people these days think reading is "stupid".