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
x

West Wing

 
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,
...
  • Recommend tagsx
+743
Views: 28714
Favorited: 132
Submitted: 04/12/2013
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to sexysexysexysex submit to reddit

Comments(175):

[ 175 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#77 - lambocj (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 (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 (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 (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 (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 (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 (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 (04/13/2013) [-]
and what better way to say more lies than religion.

sad truth
User avatar #111 to #108 - sirbutterballs (04/13/2013) [-]
...Politics
User avatar #112 to #111 - kwanzalord (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 (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 (04/13/2013) [-]
you as well
#123 to #91 - anon (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 (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 (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 (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 (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 (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 (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 (04/13/2013) [-]
That's an awesome gif.
#70 - tazze (04/13/2013) [-]
fun fact: Martin Sheen hates the Illusive Man, even though he voices him
User avatar #95 to #70 - bobbybeats (04/13/2013) [-]
Fun fact: Martin sheen has been arrested more than Charlie sheen,
User avatar #20 - supamonkey (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".
#58 - felixjarl ONLINE (04/13/2013) [-]
User avatar #159 to #58 - draezeth (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 (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 (04/14/2013) [-]
YES! SOMEONE GETS IT!
#134 to #98 - xmattx (04/13/2013) [-]
belief in something doesnt make it real.
User avatar #150 to #134 - mynameisfoo (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 (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.
#105 - anon (04/13/2013) [-]
Aww, cute. Funnyjunk trying to be like reddit.
+3
#72 - zombieplayground has deleted their comment [-]
#14 - andovaredoras (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 (04/13/2013) [-]
I live my life according to the Superman comics
#21 to #17 - teddysbawz (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 (04/13/2013) [-]
I dunno man, even superheroes can be dicks at times.
User avatar #23 to #21 - scaratel (04/13/2013) [-]
Especially Iron man. Get rich, make awesome suit, save the world, have sex with Gwyneth Paltrow.
#102 to #23 - lambslider (04/13/2013) [-]
You forgot being a raging alcoholic at times.
#29 to #14 - tyraxio (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 (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 (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.
User avatar #59 - williamweatherford (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 (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 (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 (04/13/2013) [-]
no problem!
#67 - anon (04/13/2013) [-]
its funny how constantly posts with the old testament are posted to show "haha Christians are stupid bible is stupid" when old testiment as no longer followed after the coming of jesus and all the old laws are no longer to be followed and the thing about shrimp ect and pork is back in the day we could clean it properly so eating those food would kill you.
#132 to #67 - xmattx (04/13/2013) [-]
I hate when christians use this argument...   
   

			
			You need to login to view this link
			
		 testament.htm   
   
Jesus himself (according to the bible) advocated the old testament as the inspired word of god.
I hate when christians use this argument...

You need to login to view this link testament.htm

Jesus himself (according to the bible) advocated the old testament as the inspired word of god.
#168 to #132 - xmattx (04/14/2013) [-]
Get thumbed down for stating fact... Not that I'm surprised with the people on this site. I used to be christian myself. Picking and choosing what you want to follow isn't how religion works.
0
#140 to #132 - xmattx has deleted their comment [-]
#25 - ragnarfag (04/13/2013) [-]
I hope you know that the abrahamic law or the 613 commands are only laws for the jews and do not apply to the "goy" christian, sexysexysexysex.
The only thing not jewish christian have to obey is the golden rule and the 10 commandes.
User avatar #38 to #25 - tigersstripes (04/13/2013) [-]
I am the Lord thy God, ... Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
OK, usually fallowed
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven images.
Anyone have tattoos?
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
Oh my god really?
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
mentioned in above content
Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long.
not sure how strict this is.
Thou shalt not kill.
usually fallowed
Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Pre-marital sex, considered adultury, VERY common
Thou shalt not steal.
usually fallowed
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
usually fallowed
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house.
again, not sure the exact meaning,

So...im not seeing anything about gays in here...so does that mean they are going somewhere else for that rule? and thus must fallow more/other laws.
I am not very biblically learned, so correct me if i am wrong.
User avatar #163 to #38 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
1. No issues.
2. This goes for crosses and statues of Jesus, too. This one is so widely ignored that it's painful.
3. Same.
4. Heh.
5. Such a big problem nowadays.
6. "Touch my daughter and I'll kill you." Bible-Belters usually deliver.
7. There is no describing my hatred for the amount of pre-marital sex Christians have nowadays.
8. Usually.
9. Broken all the time.
10. Broken all the time.

Also, there ARE mentions of homosexuality in the Old Testament. But still, Christians the world over break the laws of the Bible on a daily basis! It makes me livid...
User avatar #167 to #163 - tigersstripes (04/14/2013) [-]
Exactly, and gays may be mentioned elsewhere, but if they are so hooked on that rule they must have the world fallow it, then obviously they have to at least follow the others, like *hm* no shaving, eating pork, etc etc etc
User avatar #170 to #167 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
Oops, I meant New.

But yeah, if people do use the Old Testament as justification, then they should stick with the rest of it.
User avatar #172 to #170 - tigersstripes (04/14/2013) [-]
But they don't, i doubt very many people fallow all the rules from the rulebook of their choosing. Hows about we just all be good people and call it a day?
User avatar #173 to #172 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
Yeah.
User avatar #43 to #38 - ragnarfag (04/13/2013) [-]
The second refers to images of god, the third says you shouldn't misuse the the name of god (good examples are the Crusades).
Technically the NT isn't directly mentioning homosexuality, but it could be seen as adultery.
But personally I don't have a harsh opinion on homosexuality.
User avatar #47 to #43 - tigersstripes (04/13/2013) [-]
i try not to get in arguments, but i don't see why they have such a problem with it. Oh well...
#41 to #38 - theXsjados (04/13/2013) [-]
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house"
Means you should not yearn for what your neighbor has; in its most semantic sense. Ultimately that is the hardest rule to not break because how could you go through life and see someone with something better than you have and not say "I want that".
User avatar #164 to #41 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
It's actually impossible to avoid by your own power. Jesus has to be you strength to resist such a thing.

Don't be a good man, be a god-man!
#174 to #164 - theXsjados (04/15/2013) [-]
Wut? so Jesus has to want nice things for you to make it ok?
User avatar #175 to #174 - draezeth (04/15/2013) [-]
Uh.... noooooo? It's hard to explain.
User avatar #42 to #41 - tigersstripes (04/13/2013) [-]
ah. makes sense. well....im going to hell.
#81 - anon (04/13/2013) [-]
hating homosexuality and not allowing them to get married are two completely different things
User avatar #65 - dinosauraids (04/13/2013) [-]
You see the protests for Homosexual marriage,

You don't see the protests for divorce between a man and woman who hate each other
User avatar #4 - secretdestroyers (04/13/2013) [-]
It's sad that Martin Sheen was a more believable ficticious president than Bush ever was in real life.

Do ya feel good about that, Dubya? Your presidency has been made even more illegitimate, than it already was, by a ******* actor!
#109 - anon (04/13/2013) [-]
if you read the bible (yes im a christian) you would notice that most laws from god are only fr the israelites as it says "Give these instructions to the israelites" (Leviticus) so them laws doesnt apply to everyone
User avatar #129 to #109 - byposted (04/13/2013) [-]
shh you'll upset the banana boys
User avatar #34 - philliyoMLB (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.
#75 to #34 - numbersinmyname (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 (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 (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.
User avatar #36 to #34 - gatorade (04/13/2013) [-]
You're right. Thank you for not being ignorant. :D

#40 to #34 - theXsjados (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 (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.
User avatar #49 - darman (04/13/2013) [-]
It makes me sad watching the West Wing and seeing the same issues presented in that show are the same we are dealing with today. If only we could move forward as a nation.
User avatar #90 - grrphc (04/13/2013) [-]
>a badass

No, he sounds more to me like an asshole. Let the woman believe what she wants.
User avatar #93 to #90 - darthblam ONLINE (04/13/2013) [-]
Not all beliefs should be believed...
That's what he's meaning with all this...
User avatar #94 to #93 - grrphc (04/13/2013) [-]
Like it matters. He's quoting things from the Old Testament as if she's Jewish.
User avatar #96 to #94 - darthblam ONLINE (04/13/2013) [-]
"Like it matters"
... you're the one that brought it up...
User avatar #97 to #96 - grrphc (04/13/2013) [-]
Because his points are proving nothing. He's bringing things up that Jesus abolished.
User avatar #100 to #97 - darthblam ONLINE (04/13/2013) [-]
What point are you even trying to make here? That we should be OK with the Bible claiming homosexuality is an abomination? Did you even read the first panel as to why he said what he said?
User avatar #101 to #100 - grrphc (04/13/2013) [-]
The fact that he's bringing up Old Testament sayings as any form of "argument" to a Christian.
User avatar #104 to #101 - ninjasquirle (04/13/2013) [-]
Yes except for the little fact that the part the mentions homosexuality as a sin is also in the old testament. It's called being a hypocrite.
User avatar #121 to #104 - lazengahn (04/13/2013) [-]
It's also in the New Testament, unlike everything else this guy said
User avatar #122 to #121 - ninjasquirle (04/13/2013) [-]
Slavery is in the book of luke
The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)
User avatar #124 to #122 - lazengahn (04/13/2013) [-]
Except, you know, you don't go to hell for not owning a slave.
User avatar #127 to #124 - ninjasquirle (04/13/2013) [-]
Because the bible approves of it. But not homosexuality? Sorry but I rather have gays than slavery.
User avatar #133 to #127 - lazengahn (04/13/2013) [-]
I'm trying to say you can't compare Homosexuality to Slavery in the bible. On was a Sin, the other was just RULES for IF you owned a slave. Jesus could care less if you owned one or not, as long as you followed the moral code that came with it
User avatar #157 to #133 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
Yes, slavery was very different back then from what we think of. Slaves were not shipped miles across the ocean while crammed together in conditions that would kill even a water bear. At the time, slaves were more like a social class, having been sold into slavery by either themselves or their family to work for one master in exchange for food and money until their time as a slave was done.
User avatar #156 to #122 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
I feel I should also add that that was a parable.
User avatar #9 - proudnerd (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 (04/13/2013) [-]
So you dont believe in adam and eve either?
User avatar #85 to #9 - zzforrest (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.
User avatar #165 to #9 - draezeth (04/14/2013) [-]
You deserve thumbs up.
#26 to #9 - anon (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 (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 #18 to #9 - cjcasi (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 (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 ONLINE (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.
#16 to #10 - zombiebacon (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.
#13 to #10 - anon (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."
#79 to #10 - anon (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.
#15 to #10 - anon (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, "

User avatar #86 - YourAnalProbe (04/13/2013) [-]
Christians don't base everything they follow on the Bible. There's a nice thing called Oral Tradition and Catholic Catechism you know.
0
#89 to #86 - lolfire has deleted their comment [-]
[ 175 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)