Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,824 Year: 4,081/9,624 Month: 952/974 Week: 279/286 Day: 40/46 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The bible and homosexuality: Round 3
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 443 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 256 of 306 (159217)
11-13-2004 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by lfen
11-13-2004 8:35 PM


Re: Please
Again you twist it up real good, and your peanut gallery urges you on. I bet you feel great.
If you go back and read ALL my posts, you can see how we still "stone" people who cheat on their spouses today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by lfen, posted 11-13-2004 8:35 PM lfen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 258 by lfen, posted 11-13-2004 9:06 PM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 259 by lfen, posted 11-13-2004 9:14 PM riVeRraT has replied

happy_atheist
Member (Idle past 4941 days)
Posts: 326
Joined: 08-21-2004


Message 257 of 306 (159221)
11-13-2004 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 251 by riVeRraT
11-13-2004 8:32 PM


Re: Please
riverrat writes:
Can you tell me the moral of homosexuality?
Can you elaborate? Homosexuality is a sexual orientation, not a moral. It no more has a moral than heterosexuality does IMHO.
riverrat writes:
Now tell me the literal meaning of homosexuality.
An emotional and/or sexual attraction to members of the same sex? Or do you have a different definition?
This message has been edited by happy_atheist, 11-13-2004 09:07 PM
This message has been edited by happy_atheist, 11-13-2004 09:09 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 8:32 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 10:47 PM happy_atheist has replied

lfen
Member (Idle past 4704 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 258 of 306 (159223)
11-13-2004 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by riVeRraT
11-13-2004 8:52 PM


Re: Please
I bet you feel great.
Don't bet, you'd lose. I feel sad, disappointed, outraged and disgusted. None of those is what I feel when I feel great. It is possible to believe in divinity without believing literally everything in the Bible. And reading your arguments rubs my face in how far the emotional irrationality of inerrancy will take someone.
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 8:52 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 10:49 PM lfen has replied

lfen
Member (Idle past 4704 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 259 of 306 (159225)
11-13-2004 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by riVeRraT
11-13-2004 8:52 PM


Re: Please
If you go back and read ALL my posts, you can see how we still "stone" people who cheat on their spouses today.
Your argument is that law wasn't literal?????
People weren't to take rocks and batter the victim with them until they died of their injuries? What do you hold the Bible meant went it says "stoned" then? Is it meant like in Dylan's song "Everyone must get stoned"?
I know someone on the losing end of a divorce settlement may feel like they have been dealt an injustice, but they are alive, they are not physically harmed. You've not even addressed the issues of what if the woman had children?
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 8:52 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 263 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 11:00 PM lfen has replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6050 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 260 of 306 (159226)
11-13-2004 9:15 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by riVeRraT
11-13-2004 8:22 PM


Re: Please
You too, need to put your train of thought back a couple thousand yearsm so that you could understand the statement.
Forget all what you said.
Forget? Thanks for the summary dismissal, as opposed to addressing my comments in good faith.
Based on your above comments, it seems that you have knowledge that a couple thousand years ago, all women that were silent during a rape were enjoying it. What was essentially different about women a few thousand years ago that none of them would retreat into silence rather than cry out?
All the verse is trying to say is, if you enjoy the rape, then you are really cheating, and you get stoned.
Why did the verse "try to say it", rather than actually state "enjoyment", rather than silence, as the crime:
Deu 22:24
Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 8:22 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 11:13 PM pink sasquatch has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 443 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 261 of 306 (159241)
11-13-2004 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by happy_atheist
11-13-2004 9:01 PM


Re: Please
Right, the moral and the act is the same thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by happy_atheist, posted 11-13-2004 9:01 PM happy_atheist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 271 by happy_atheist, posted 11-14-2004 8:47 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 443 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 262 of 306 (159242)
11-13-2004 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by lfen
11-13-2004 9:06 PM


Re: Please
You agreed with me, once you fully understand what I was saying.
So how is it rubbing your face?
Or you just don't like when your feathers are ruffled, or or you don't like to ruffle anyones feathers, or you have not ruffled anyones feathers, or you would have not ever ruffled anyones feathers?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by lfen, posted 11-13-2004 9:06 PM lfen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by lfen, posted 11-14-2004 4:34 PM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 443 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 263 of 306 (159248)
11-13-2004 11:00 PM
Reply to: Message 259 by lfen
11-13-2004 9:14 PM


Re: Please
Where does it say stoned to death?
I speak from experience when I say I would rather recieve a stoning, than suffer the rest of my life without knowing my daughter, that my ex-girlfriend has brainwashed to hate me. She hates me, and doesn't even know me. That hurts more than any stupid stoning. Years of pain and suffering. It still hurts even though I am now free of the anger, because I forgive her, even though she still does it to me.
There were times even that I would have prefered to be stoned to death.
Maybe life was so screwd up back then, and people were so corrupt, that the only way to keep them in line was to stone to death. But I was not under the impression that the woman was stoned to death, I would hope not.
To me the moral of the story is, that if your woman cheats on you, she is wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by lfen, posted 11-13-2004 9:14 PM lfen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by lfen, posted 11-14-2004 4:51 PM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 443 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 264 of 306 (159250)
11-13-2004 11:13 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by pink sasquatch
11-13-2004 9:15 PM


Re: Please
Based on your above comments, it seems that you have knowledge that a couple thousand years ago, all women that were silent during a rape were enjoying it. What was essentially different about women a few thousand years ago that none of them would retreat into silence rather than cry out?
I believe I have addressed that already, and you are still taking it wrong.
with stones that they die;
So they did stone them to death, both of them.
Pretty strick uh? Pretty severe too. Thank God he sent his son to forgive us of our sins now.
So if the woman enjoys it, she gets stoned to death.
If the man does it he gets stoned to death.
I know men today that would kill their wives if they caught them cheating, and the man too.
I also know women that would love to see their rapiest die.
So then I ask, why is this so harsh that these same thoughts and principals are in the bible? what is the real difference?
Isn't it almost as painfull for all those involved when a woman cheats, or a man rapes, as death? This must have been the best solution for the time.
I also look at it like if I was a woman. Lets see, I am getting raped. If I scream, my attacker my kill me, if I don't I will get stoned to death. If I scream, I might get saved also. think think think..AHHHHH!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by pink sasquatch, posted 11-13-2004 9:15 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by pink sasquatch, posted 11-13-2004 11:38 PM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 272 by happy_atheist, posted 11-14-2004 9:02 AM riVeRraT has replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6050 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 265 of 306 (159253)
11-13-2004 11:38 PM
Reply to: Message 264 by riVeRraT
11-13-2004 11:13 PM


Re: Please
I know men today that would kill their wives if they caught them cheating, and the man too. I also know women that would love to see their rapiest die.
So then I ask, why is this so harsh that these same thoughts and principals are in the bible? what is the real difference?
They're still harsh now. And there is a real difference between killing an attacker and killing a victim.
Just because people want these things to happen, does not make them correct. Indeed it is illegal to kill your partner for cheating or to kill your rapist after-the-fact.
Also, you don't seem to be making the distinction between killing the rapist, and killing the victim.
How would you feel if you were mugged, and both you and your mugger had to spend three years in jail. It is an idiotic concept.
Isn't it almost as painfull for all those involved when a woman cheats, or a man rapes, as death?
Is cheating or rape worse than death? No.
This must have been the best solution for the time.
I believe it was more an issue of women-as-property. A married woman was stoned to death for not crying out. If you read on, if an unmarried virgin is raped, neither the rapist nor the woman is stoned - instead, the rapist has to buy the raped virgin from her father.
Do you get that? The rape victim becomes property of the rapist. There obviously is zero concern for the rape victim in the Bible, except for violation of property rights.
I also look at it like if I was a woman. Lets see, I am getting raped. If I scream, my attacker my kill me, if I don't I will get stoned to death. If I scream, I might get saved also. think think think..AHHHHH!
If you were being raped, would you think so logically while being violently violated? I doubt it.
You seem quite ignorant of the reality of rape. Often victims are silent not because of fear of their attacker, but because of psychological compensation or break-down.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 11:13 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by riVeRraT, posted 11-14-2004 1:25 AM pink sasquatch has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 443 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 266 of 306 (159268)
11-14-2004 1:25 AM
Reply to: Message 265 by pink sasquatch
11-13-2004 11:38 PM


Re: Please
They're still harsh now. And there is a real difference between killing an attacker and killing a victim.
Yes, I totally agree with you, but if you have been listening to me, I am saying that what I think the bible is implying about a woman not screaming, is like saying she is not really a victim.
Just because people want these things to happen, does not make them correct. Indeed it is illegal to kill your partner for cheating or to kill your rapist after-the-fact.
Of course it is. If we did, then everyone would be dead now, wouldn't they. Well almost everyone. You see how they glorify cheating on TV these days? Its an awesome world humanism has created isn't it?
Is cheating or rape worse than death? No.
Thats not what I said. I said being raped, or being cheated on ain't no picnic. Some even kill themselves over it, because death is preferable.
If you were being raped, would you think so logically while being violently violated? I doubt it.
Your right, I would probably just scream.
And now for the complete verse in context, because you guys have been mixing up verses.
quote:
22 If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.
That is one thought.
Then it goes on to:
quote:
23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death-the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife. You must purge the evil from among you.
quote:
25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the girl; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders his neighbor, 27 for the man found the girl out in the country, and though the betrothed girl screamed, there was no one to rescue her.
So after have read those 3, it makes a little more sense, FOR THE TIME. Not today. The morals there are still in effect today.
Now for the tough one:
quote:
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. [3] He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
I will admit that this is a crazy verse. But for the time, it may have been needed. It was what Moses made as law, because he saw that it would work for the mindset of the people at that time. You cannot change the minds of people that easy, that is apparent in this forum.
If a woman was violated, she would not be a virgin anymore. This back then was everything to a woman, and the community. If she married and they found out she wasn't a virgin, they would kill her. So once she got raped, that guy who did it, better love her, because he is now out 50 shekels, and has to support her for the rest of his life. I don't feel as though this law was written to degrade woman, as much as it was written to deter men from doing such an act.
Now we have a hard time understanding it, because things are way different. Our culture is based on our needs for the time. 2000 years from now, we might look back and say how silly our laws are right now. There are plenty of stupid laws on the books right now. One of them being killing someone who tresspasses into your house, and you go to jail for killing him, and defending your home, just because he didn't have a gun or something stupid like that. Just look at the OJ fiasco, tell me that wasn't our Law in all its glory. We actually pay people to lie for us, so we can get away with murder, and all though this is not leagal when worded like that, it happens everyday, and it is widely accepted. So the law says one thing, yet we do another.
A quote from a commentary:
Commentaries:
Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
<< Previous verse Next verse >>
Deuteronomy 22:13-30
If a man take a wife, etc.--The regulations that follow might be imperatively needful in the then situation of the Israelites; and yet, it is not necessary that we should curiously and impertinently inquire into them. So far was it from being unworthy of God to leave such things upon record, that the enactments must heighten our admiration of His wisdom and goodness in the management of a people so perverse and so given to irregular passions. Nor is it a better argument that the Scriptures were not written by inspiration of God to object that this passage, and others of a like nature, tend to corrupt the imagination and will be abused by evil-disposed readers, than it is to say that the sun was not created by God, because its light may be abused by wicked men as an assistant in committing crimes which they have meditated [HORNE].
Matthew Henrey comments:
Deuteronomy 22:1-30
Of humanity towards brethren. (1-4) Various precepts. (5-12) Against impurity. (13-30)
Verses 1-4 If we duly regard the golden rule of "doing to others as we would they should do unto us," many particular precepts might be omitted. We can have no property in any thing that we find. Religion teaches us to be neighbourly, and to be ready to do all good offices to all men. We know not how soon we may have occasion for help.
Verses 5-12 God's providence extends itself to the smallest affairs, and his precepts do so, that even in them we may be in the fear of the Lord, as we are under his eye and care. Yet the tendency of these laws, which seem little, is such, that being found among the things of God's law, they are to be accounted great things. If we would prove ourselves to be God's people, we must have respect to his will and to his glory, and not to the vain fashions of the world. Even in putting on our garments, as in eating or in drinking, all must be done with a serious regard to preserve our own and others' purity in heart and actions. Our eye should be single, our heart simple, and our behaviour all of a piece.
Verses 13-30 These and the like regulations might be needful then, and yet it is not necessary that we should curiously examine respecting them. The laws relate to the seventh commandment, laying a restraint upon fleshly lusts which war against the soul.
I think all of those laws were geared towards keeping the woman pure, and keeping the man from making her unpure, just to satisfy his needs of the flesh.
Woman back then were for the taking, thats just the way it was. There were no guns, no midget lawers, and the rule of the land was a strong hand. you didn't survive on this earth unless you were strong enough too.
If we took everyone here on this forum, and stuck them on a deserted island, never to be seen again by society, some of the rules might change in respect to how we live. The stronger ones would have more say, or the majority would rule, unless the strongest person decided to kick everyones ass. Thats just the way it is, you can't change that. That person too, would also be able to take a woman if he wanted to. Whats to stop him? It grows from there. We would then have our own set of rules, based on our situation, and who was there, so we could survive. These rules would be completely out of line with the rest of society.
You want to dis-regard a book, that is so filled with information that can help you, with so much love and peace, because you can't relate to the times. You then call it evil, and dismiss it.
But I bet you, there are parts of the world that you would have no trouble visiting, and cherish your visit, even though some of there rules do not conform to your way of thinking. you would never call them evil. you would just accept them as being from a different culture, and have there own set of rules based on their situation and surroundings, and their history.
I will admit to you, as I have before to others here, I have not even read the whole OT. It is not even necessary to get to know God. The most important thing is knowing Jesus's words. I don't think I have ever seen someone in here dispute his words. It was his walk with faith, and by his example we are to follow. He promised us all of those things that he did, and greater, if we could just walk the walk.
I see it happening in my life.
This is also why, I do not get so hung up on whether Homosexuality is right or wrong, with the bible. It is very clear in there that it was against the bible, and Jesus "didn't come to change the law". Regardless of all that, I do not feel it is right, and when I ask God, he does not give me the feeling that it is right, but that I am not to judge those who do it, but to pray for them. I also won't be the one sitting in heaven saying "I told you so". Everyone is were their at for a reason. I fully understand that.
If your a gay person and looking for someone who doesn't think its right to sit here and say, yea its ok, I don't think thats going to happen either.
Now if we want to rationalize everything like Yaro tried to do by saying:
You seem to be supporting the OT, rape and all, by simply saying "things were different back then so it was ok". Since that is the case, why can't I simply say "Things are different now, so homosexuality is ok"?
Yes we can say that the times have changed, and our culture has changed. Even Jesus has helped to change the way we think. He is the main reason why we have changed so much. But the morals remain. Is she saying Jesus came down and said "Homosexuality is ok"?
Its all BS. The way things are today rape happens all the time. Our society is brainwashed into thinking that having sex is the thing to do, and relationships are out the window. I know not all people are like this, but have you watch TV lately. I am disgusted at how our nation is behaving. When I was younger, I couldn't even see it, because I to was brain washed to flow right along with it. Guys lie to girls, and tell them they love them just to get in their pants. To me thats a form of rape. Maybe the girl enjoyed it for the monent, but she lives with the pain and anguish of being lied to for the rest of her life. She then makes an oath to herself to never let that happen again, and then the next guy that comes along gets to deal with all that pain.
Give me a break.
8 All things are wearisome,
more than one can say.
The eye never has enough of seeing,
nor the ear its fill of hearing.
9 What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
10 Is there anything of which one can say,
"Look! This is something new"?
It was here already, long ago;
it was here before our time.
Its all BS. Anyone who professes to know the answers is full of it, unless they now the truth, the only truth, and thats God, he's the only truth. You know, the one in your heart. The true person you are. You know, you without all the BS.
How do you find him? One way is through the bible, you know that evil book with all those crazy stories from a time we know little about.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by pink sasquatch, posted 11-13-2004 11:38 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by pink sasquatch, posted 11-14-2004 2:22 AM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 275 by lfen, posted 11-14-2004 5:21 PM riVeRraT has replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6050 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 267 of 306 (159280)
11-14-2004 2:22 AM
Reply to: Message 266 by riVeRraT
11-14-2004 1:25 AM


ignoring the parts of the OT you don't like
Hey RiverRat,
Thanks for taking the time to address my points and include commentary.
Your right, I would probably just scream.
Quite likely, because that is your natural response to that situation. For someone else, their natural response may be to retreat from reality and remain silent in the process. That doesn't mean they are consenting.
You see how they glorify cheating on TV these days? Its an awesome world humanism has created isn't it?
Humanism created sex on TV? You'll need to start a new thread to prove that one... The Bible is one of the most popular and longest-lived books in the world and contains plenty of sex and violence and cheating.
I think my whole confusion about your stance comes down to these sort of statements you've made:
it makes a little more sense, FOR THE TIME. Not today. The morals there are still in effect today.
Why does it not makes sense for the present, but the morals are still in effect for the present? That doesn't make sense.
I don't feel as though this law was written to degrade woman, as much as it was written to deter men from doing such an act.
You're right, because at the time women were treated like property, and it would be difficult to degrade them further.
From the commentary:
So far was it from being unworthy of God to leave such things upon record, that the enactments must heighten our admiration of His wisdom and goodness in the management of a people so perverse and so given to irregular passions.
My reading: We should have heightened respect for God because of His use of harsh laws to manage the perverse.
My response: A "wise and good" God wouldn't kill the victim along with the perpetrator of the crime. (Then again, a "wise and good" God wouldn't do half of things God did in the OT.)
no midget lawers
What the fuck?!?!?
I will admit to you, as I have before to others here, I have not even read the whole OT. It is not even necessary to get to know God.
I have a serious problem with this statement. To me it is like saying, I don't need to hear about the atrocities of the Holocaust to know Hitler, I know all I need to know about him from his good deeds.
I think the real reason many Christians skip the OT is because it reveals God to have an evil side capable of all sorts of atrocities, often for very petty reasons. At times He seems on par with a school-yard bully with omnipotence.
As long as you ignore the OT, you can be content to follow a "loving" God without paying attention to His history as a genocidal maniac.
You want to dis-regard a book, that is so filled with information that can help you, with so much love and peace, because you can't relate to the times. You then call it evil, and dismiss it.
I've never done or said these things, so please don't put words in my mouth. There are parts of the Bible that are filled with love and wisdom. But the Bible also contains many acts and laws that can only be described as evil. I don't think you can just skip over these like they never happened and pick the moments that fit your worldview.
Now if we want to rationalize everything like Yaro tried to do... Yes we can say that the times have changed, and our culture has changed. Even Jesus has helped to change the way we think. He is the main reason why we have changed so much. But the morals remain. Is she saying Jesus came down and said "Homosexuality is ok"?
RiverRat, you do have to provide evidence why the anti-homosexuality rule remains enforce, while you throw out 90% of the rest of the rules of the OT.
It is NOT Yaro who is rationalizing here, it is you.
Have you:
Refused to eat ham and cheese sandwiches?
What about all-you-can-eat shrimp?
Refused to wear a nice cotton-polyester blend?
Stoned a farmer to death for sowing two crops in the same field?
Sacrificed an animal to God?
Refused to get a tattoo?
Refused to shave your beard?
Owned a slave?
Burned a girl to death for premarital sex?
Refused to get a divorce?
Prevented people with disabilities from attending church?
Had a priest poison your wife when you suspect her of cheating?
Sold your daughter to her rapist?
Considered homosexuality wrong?
The answer to all of the above questions should be 'yes', if you want to remain consistent in following Biblical proclamation.
I'm guessing it is only regarding the last question that you choose to follow Biblical law. You have to rationalize in order to ignore that which you consider evil or absurd, while holding on to the one thing you want to agree with....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by riVeRraT, posted 11-14-2004 1:25 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by riVeRraT, posted 11-14-2004 9:00 PM pink sasquatch has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 268 of 306 (159294)
11-14-2004 5:09 AM
Reply to: Message 241 by riVeRraT
11-13-2004 8:04 PM


Re: Please
riVeRraT responds to me:
quote:
Go back and read all my posts on this subject. If you still don't get it, I can't help you.
Oh, I get it, all right.
You're a sexist, egotistical, lying, hypocritical bigot (10 points for those that know where that phrase comes from.) Women like to be raped. Gay people are mental defectives who are after your children. Jews are afraid that Christians might be right.
There is absolutely nobody that you do not look down on in contempt. There is no love in your heart.

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 8:04 PM riVeRraT has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 269 of 306 (159296)
11-14-2004 5:21 AM
Reply to: Message 244 by riVeRraT
11-13-2004 8:08 PM


Re: Please
riVeRraT responds to me:
quote:
Thats awesome rhain, you've repeated yourself for the 1000th time.
Thanks. I owe it all to you. I couldn't have repeated myself 1000 times if you hadn't been parroting the same discredited bull over and over again. It's amazing how you never seem to learn. No matter how many times you're shown to be wrong, you're back in 20 minutes repeating the same lies as if nothing had happened.
Very impressive.
quote:
Go back and answer your own questions
Oh, I already have but I'm too much of a gentleman to say them here. Besides, I don't think you'd like it if I spilled your secrets, now would you?
quote:
I told you, I'm through with you
If you're through with me, why do you keep responding? This is the third or fourth time you've said that and you keep coming back for more. Why is that?
Answer the question: What kind of man turns your crank? You're the one saying that you could have "slipped" and become gay, so there must be something about men you find sexually attractive. What is it?
quote:
you are dishonest, insulting, and a liar. You even admitted it.
Dishonest? That's your department. Liar? You, again. But insulting, I'll share that one.
After all, it's only directed at those who have insulted others in the first place. It's intended to show them what it's like to be the recipient of the bile that they spew. If you don't like it, perhaps you should consider what it is you're putting out (see, that's that "rhetoric" thing that you so despise.)
Women like to be raped, gays are child molesters, Jews are scared. Yeah, those are loving things. I can feel it all the way over here in California. You have such a warm feeling toward your fellow man and your heart bleeds when they hurt.
By the way, that's "sarcasm." It's also part of that "rhetoric" thing you detest so much.

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 8:08 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by riVeRraT, posted 11-14-2004 8:36 PM Rrhain has replied

The Dread Dormammu
Inactive Member


Message 270 of 306 (159299)
11-14-2004 5:52 AM
Reply to: Message 247 by riVeRraT
11-13-2004 8:19 PM


Truthfully?
Thanks Dread, and welcome to the forum. You can choose to ignore rhain at any given moment. He only picks on me because I am Christian.
No he picks on you because he disagrees with you, and you do not support your arguments.
Let me set a few things straight, and you can go back and read my posts. Only rhain would twist them around to make them sound otherwise. His logic is, that If I do not agree with Homosexuality, then I hate homo's.
Well, can you at least understand why someone who's homosexual might be just a little bit offended when you say that homosexuality is a sin? I mean you can protest and say "Well, we are all sinners" but nonetheless you are saying that something about them that they beleve they can not change is inhernetly wrong.
I will however not judge a person by his/her actions, I am in no position to do such. No matter what rhain thinks, I will not do that.
Uh huh, but if you were alive 2000 years ago you would have stoned a woman to death for not screaming during a rape. Please explain how that is not judging someone based on their actions.
If I point something out in the bible that is against God, I am not condemming anyone. I profess that I am no better than that person. But that does not mean, that we cannot point these things out to each other.
You may not think you are any better than that person but you ARE still saying that they are doing something wrong. You are saying that homosexuality is a SIN.
Look, think about it this way, lets say we agree that we are both sinners. You point out that it is wrong to steal, and I point out that it is wrong to grow 2 different kinds of crops next to each other; When you get mad at me for trying to burn down your "unclean crops" I say "Hey it's alright I'm a sinner too." You would not be angry that I tried to correct you, though you might be angry about that too, you would be angry that I tried to "correct" something that wasn't wrong.
Now you may protest that you won't take any actions against homosexuals but what do you think you are doing when you vote down gay marrage?
So tell me, if you found out your wife enjoyed her being raped, what would you do? Truthfully.
First of all it is a logical impossibility for someone to enjoy rape. For it to be rape, the person being raped has to not want it, right? There are 3 questions I think you might be asking here and I will answer them in turn.
1) What would I do if I found out my wife had been raped: I would call the police, try to catch/stop/imprison the rapist, find counseling for my wife etc.
2)What would I do if I found out my wife had been cheating on me: I would divorce her or seek couples counceling depending on the circumstances.
3)What would I do if I found out my wife had sexual fantasys about rape: I would discuss it with her, and perhaps could be persuaded to participate in a safe fantasy with her (Complete with safety words etc).
Truthfully, thats what I would do. BUT even if that is NOT what I would do, it wouldnt make it right for me to stone her to death! It's not enough for you to say:
Rape=bad
And then argue that it would be permissable to stone a rape victim to death.
You have to explain (and good luck) why it could EVER conceveably be right to stone a woman (or anyone for that matter) to death AT ALL! Let alone some poor woman who has had somthing unspeakably horrible done to her.
This is what I meant when I said your comments about rape were several orders of magintude worse. I picked on rrhain because I am on his side and I don't like my side to behave like that. I wish someone on your side would take offense at some of the things you say. Phatboy, other Christians, I'm waiting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 247 by riVeRraT, posted 11-13-2004 8:19 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by riVeRraT, posted 11-14-2004 8:57 PM The Dread Dormammu has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024