Pastor Steven Anderson: “If You Executed the Homos Like God Recommends,” the World Would be AIDS-Free by Christmas

By:  hal-a-lujah  •  5 months ago  •  126 comments

Pastor Steven Anderson: “If You Executed the Homos Like God Recommends,” the World Would be AIDS-Free by Christmas

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
Hal A. Lujah
1  author  Hal A. Lujah    5 months ago

This is an old video, but I posted it for a reason.  Recently I learned that a YouTuber that goes by the name Skylar Fiction, was censored by YouTube for 'promoting hate speech'.  The crime?  Skylar posted a video interview with a young preacher (22 yrs. old) who was openly declaring that the government should execute all homosexuals.  Skylar did this simply to bring light to the fact that there are seriously people in this country with such abhorrent opinions, and yet HE (Skylar) was the one accused of promoting hate speech.  Skylar lost an appeal with YouTube over the situation, which would indicate that an actual human did look at the parameters of the situation and confirmed that it was the right move.  Since then YouTube has apparently come to their senses and reversed the censoring, probably due to an uproar about how incredibly backwards their ruling was.  My question is, how is it that a 2014 video of a guy wanting to execute tens of millions of people across the globe is not considered hate speech, when YouTube claims to have removed 8.3 million videos that exhibited hate speech?

See the 22 year old bigot with dangerous opinions here:

 
 
Tessylo
2  Tessylo    5 months ago

I'm sure it will be soon that we'll find the 'pastor' Anderson with his pants down with little girls, or little boys.  

 
 
Bob Nelson
3  Bob Nelson    5 months ago

How does YouTube define "hate speech"?

Countries that have anti-hate-speech laws define the topic very precisely, both to prevent abusive usage by the authorities, and to ensure conviction when charges are brought.

Application is not left to the appreciation of a Mod the police.

 
 
Dean Moriarty
3.1  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Bob Nelson @3    5 months ago

Hopefully hate speech is protected. Next thing you know people will be getting locked up for sayin' I hate cancer. 

 
 
MrFrost
3.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  Dean Moriarty @3.1    5 months ago

In what way does hate speech benefit society? 

 
 
Bob Nelson
3.1.2  Bob Nelson  replied to  Dean Moriarty @3.1    5 months ago
Next thing you know people will be getting locked up for sayin I hate cancer.

Excellent example, Dean. It is precisely to avoid this kind of abuse that anti-hate-speech laws are strictly delimited.

 
 
Old School Marine
3.1.3  Old School Marine  replied to  Dean Moriarty @3.1    5 months ago
Hopefully hate speech is protected.

It unequivocally is:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/19/supreme-court-unanimously-reaffirms-there-is-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/?utm_term=.7db62b805abe

UNANIMOUS RULING 8-0 and that because Gorsuch had not yet been sworn in

 
 
Old School Marine
3.1.4  Old School Marine  replied to  MrFrost @3.1.1    5 months ago
In what way does hate speech benefit society?

Well let me ask you this:

What does it benefit this discussion for you and Tessy to be on here talking about people banging their daughters?

What does it benefit any conversation to call the President of the United States a Nazi?

What does it benefit any conversation to attack the president's wife and kids and especially in the case of that asswipe Peter Fonda and what he said last week about Barron Trump?

Do any of those things benefit any conversation?

 
 
MrFrost
3.1.5  MrFrost  replied to  Old School Marine @3.1.4    5 months ago

My point was that he isnt the only Christian that thinks that way. We know YOU don't but there are actually a lot of Christians that do think that way which isn't very Christian. 

 
 
Old School Marine
3.1.6  Old School Marine  replied to  MrFrost @3.1.5    5 months ago
My point was that he isnt the only Christian that thinks that way. We know YOU don't but there are actually a lot of Christians that do think that way which isn't very Christian.

And my point, in response to your comment, is that no type of derogatory speech is beneficial to the advancement of any discussion and I simply pointed out some examples is all.  I'm guilty of the very same thing as well. 

But at the end of the day, the bottom line is that the the Supreme Court has ruled unanimously on this issue regardless of your opinion or my opinion or anyone's opinion.

 
 
Dean Moriarty
3.1.7  Dean Moriarty  replied to  MrFrost @3.1.1    5 months ago

I got them to stop playing techno music in the gym at our local recreational center by mobilizing enough people to let them know we hate that crap. 

I was also a big player in helping to kill disc music during the rock vs disco wars. Without the disco sucks bumper stickers we might still be stuck with it. 

 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.1.8  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Dean Moriarty @3.1.7    5 months ago

I will take disco over rock any day.

 
 
Done
3.1.9  Done  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1.8    5 months ago

 Oh my god that is about a shocking anything you’ve ever said.

 
 
Sunshine
3.1.10  Sunshine  replied to  Dean Moriarty @3.1.7    5 months ago

Disco was a fad...rock lives on!!!!peace 2

 
 
Skrekk
3.1.11  Skrekk  replied to  Dean Moriarty @3.1    5 months ago
Hopefully hate speech is protected.

It isn't protected on privately owned web sites like youtube.    Bummer for you folks, eh?

 
 
MrFrost
3.1.12  MrFrost  replied to  Dean Moriarty @3.1.7    5 months ago

So you are not in favor of free speech.....unless YOU like it. Got it, good to know. 

 
 
MrFrost
3.1.13  MrFrost  replied to  Old School Marine @3.1.4    5 months ago

Let me clarify... I agree that hate speech is protected speech...No argument there, my point is that it serves no useful purpose. 

 
 
IceMan
3.1.14  IceMan  replied to  Sunshine @3.1.10    5 months ago
Disco was a fad

Disco was a communist plot to destroy the minds of America's youth

 
 
Gordy327
3.1.15  Gordy327  replied to  IceMan @3.1.14    5 months ago
Disco was a communist plot to destroy the minds of America's youth

I thought that was rock & roll and Elvis was a communist agent sent to do just that?

 
 
IceMan
3.1.16  IceMan  replied to  Gordy327 @3.1.15    5 months ago
I thought that was rock & roll and Elvis was a communist agent sent to do just that?

Elvis did a lot of gospel songs, maybe he was a double agent.

 
 
Gordy327
3.1.17  Gordy327  replied to  IceMan @3.1.16    5 months ago
Elvis did a lot of gospel songs, maybe he was a double agent.

What better way to avoid suspicion, right?

 
 
Old School Marine
3.1.18  Old School Marine  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1.8    5 months ago
I will take disco over rock any day.

Face Palm

 
 
MrFrost
3.1.19  MrFrost  replied to  Old School Marine @3.1.18    5 months ago

Agreed... Disco.....is dead...thankfully. 

 
 
Trout Giggles
3.1.20  Trout Giggles  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1.8    5 months ago

Yer pulling our legs....aren't you?

 
 
Old School Marine
3.1.21  Old School Marine  replied to  MrFrost @3.1.13    4 months ago
Let me clarify... I agree that hate speech is protected speech...No argument there, my point is that it serves no useful purpose.

I would agree with that statement.

 
 
Hal A. Lujah
3.2  author  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Bob Nelson @3    5 months ago
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
4  author  Hal A. Lujah    5 months ago

Incidentally, there is a really good tv series on Hulu called The Handmaid's Tale.  The premise is an America that was overtaken by a movement of people with ideologies like those exhibited in these videos.  It's a cautionary fictional tale of sorts.  Come to think of it, one of the lead characters actually looks a lot like Pastor Anderson.  I have to wonder whether that was intentional.

 
 
Trout Giggles
4.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @4    5 months ago

It's an awesome show.

 
 
Freefaller
4.1.1  Freefaller  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.1    5 months ago

Don't get the show but I did read the book many, many years ago imo Margaret Atwoods best work

 
 
Trout Giggles
4.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Freefaller @4.1.1    5 months ago

I'm on my 10th reading right now

 
 
Skrekk
4.2  Skrekk  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @4    5 months ago
It's a cautionary fictional tale of sorts.

It's a good rule book for wumminfolk to follow in Trump's Amerikkka.

 
 
MrFrost
5  MrFrost    5 months ago

Reminds me of Josh Duggar whos father, ultra far right wing radicalized Christian father JimBob Duggar, yelled for years that pedophiles and homosexuals should be executed....only to find out his son was laying wood to his 5 year old sisters. 

 
 
Tessylo
5.1  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @5    5 months ago

I bet Jim Boob laid wood to all of his daughters.  

 
 
MrFrost
5.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  Tessylo @5.1    5 months ago

And i wouldn't be surprised if josh was banging his mother....seriously...

 
 
devangelical
5.1.2  devangelical  replied to  MrFrost @5.1.1    5 months ago

Sex education, home school style.

 
 
Tessylo
5.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @5.1.1    5 months ago

I would have to agree - lots of those kids looked remarkably alike and lowbrow.  Inbreeding at its' best.  

 
 
MrFrost
6  MrFrost    5 months ago

I guess i didn't get the memo from God saying homosexuals should be executed. Must be an oversite because we all know Stevens would NEVER make something like that up to suit his own hate filled agenda....

.

/sarc

 
 
Old School Marine
7  Old School Marine    5 months ago

This so called pastor is a fucking idiot.  He's a mental case of the worst kind and is teaching false teaching to his congregation. 

Christianity is under GRACE not the LAW.  Ephesians 2:8-9:

For it is by graceyou have been saved,through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works,so that no one can boast.

The entire reason for Christ going to the cross was to become the final sacrifice for all mankind, thereby moving into the age of grace because the law obviously wasn't working.  

This being the case, for this dude to even insinuate that the church move backwards to the law is about as ridiculous as someone claiming satan will ever become an archangel again.

Same thing with those lunatics at WBC in Topeka.

 
 
MrFrost
7.1  MrFrost  replied to  Old School Marine @7    5 months ago

Well said.


 
 
Old School Marine
7.1.1  Old School Marine  replied to  MrFrost @7.1    5 months ago

What I said is the truth about Grace and the Law.  And if I were to be face to face with this false teacher calling himself a pastor, rest assured I would say the exact same thing to his face that I've said here make no mistake about it.

 
 
MrFrost
7.1.2  MrFrost  replied to  Old School Marine @7.1.1    5 months ago

Yep same here, like i said, good post Man...

 
 
Old School Marine
7.1.3  Old School Marine  replied to  MrFrost @7.1.2    5 months ago
Yep same here, like i said, good post Man...

Thanks and Semper Fi!

 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
7.2  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Old School Marine @7    5 months ago

You just surprised the shit out of me.

 
 
Old School Marine
7.2.1  Old School Marine  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7.2    5 months ago
You just surprised the shit out of me.

Well I've been known to have my moments, hehehehehe....................

 
 
Trout Giggles
7.2.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @7.2    5 months ago

Ya know what? He didn't surprise me. OSM is a pretty good dude

 
 
Old School Marine
7.2.3  Old School Marine  replied to  Trout Giggles @7.2.2    4 months ago
Ya know what? He didn't surprise me. OSM is a pretty good dude

Trout I love ya to death girl!!!thumbs up

 
 
Trout Giggles
7.2.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Old School Marine @7.2.3    4 months ago

Hugs!

 
 
Paula Bartholomew
7.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Old School Marine @7    5 months ago

OMG!  My world as I know it, is ending.  Not only was what you said is spot on, but I voted you up. winkingBig hugs

 
 
Old School Marine
7.3.1  Old School Marine  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7.3    5 months ago
OMG!  My world as I know it, is ending.  Not only was what you said is spot on, but I voted you up.

Well thanks Paula, but I mean really disco over rock?!?!?!?!?  laughing dude

 
 
Paula Bartholomew
7.3.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Old School Marine @7.3.1    5 months ago

Well to be fair, I do like a few rock songs but disco music brings back fond memories of my youth.

 
 
Old School Marine
7.3.3  Old School Marine  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7.3.2    4 months ago
Well to be fair, I do like a few rock songs but disco music brings back fond memories of my youth.

Well I can certainly relate to that.

 
 
Skrekk
7.4  Skrekk  replied to  Old School Marine @7    5 months ago
Same thing with those lunatics at WBC in Topeka.

No surprise that both Steven Anderson and Fred Phelps came from the ideology of right-wing Baptists.    Anderson is an Independent Baptist while Phelps was ordained as a Southern Baptist.

 
 
Old School Marine
7.4.1  Old School Marine  replied to  Skrekk @7.4    5 months ago
No surprise that both Steven Anderson and Fred Phelps came from the ideology of right-wing Baptists.    Anderson is an Independent Baptist while Phelps was ordained as a Southern Baptist.
I have to admit I'm not up to speed as much as I probably should be where the doctrine of independent baptists is concerned, but the southern baptist doctrine certainly doesn't contain anything which even remotely resembles the WBC lunacy.
 
 
Trout Giggles
7.4.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Skrekk @7.4    5 months ago

I would have thought this guy would be even more loony tunes like a Pentecostal type of church that still uses snakes in their worship

 
 
Skrekk
7.4.3  Skrekk  replied to  Old School Marine @7.4.1    5 months ago
the southern baptist doctrine certainly doesn't contain anything which even remotely resembles the WBC lunacy.

Sure it does, it's just a bit less honest and less direct in the anti-LGBT crap it preaches.    But until very recently they even endorsed such things as "ex-gay" quackery and they still say that gays should be denied civil rights like marriage, and prohibited from being pastors and from having religious weddings.

And again, Fred Phelps was ordained as an SBC pastor.

 
 
Dulay
7.5  Dulay  replied to  Old School Marine @7    5 months ago

Yet unfortunately, no matter how full of shit his religious POV is, he and his 'church' still enjoy tax free status. It's a travesty.

 
 
Texan1211
7.5.1  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.5    5 months ago

Have your reps present legislation to Congress to change it then.

Good luck with that, BTW.

 
 
IceMan
7.5.2  IceMan  replied to  Dulay @7.5    5 months ago
Yet unfortunately, no matter how full of shit his religious POV is, he and his 'church' still enjoy tax free status. It's a travesty.

Anderson's Faithfull World Baptist Church pays taxes it is not a 501c3 certified tax exempt church.

 
 
Old School Marine
7.5.3  Old School Marine  replied to  Dulay @7.5    5 months ago
Yet unfortunately, no matter how full of shit his religious POV is, he and his 'church' still enjoy tax free status. It's a travesty.

I mean the tax free status is what it is.  That being said, this dude is a lunatic, period.  I know of no true Bible believing christian anywhere who would agree with this teaching because Christianity is not bound by the law.

 
 
Dulay
7.5.4  Dulay  replied to  Old School Marine @7.5.3    5 months ago
I mean the tax free status is what it is.

Though is shouldn't be, should it? And therein lies the rub. 

The argument has been about 'government recognition' for one right and it SHOULD have been about another. 

I for one don't appreciate my tax dollars going to help promote this fuck wads ideology. 

 
 
Raven Wing
7.6  Raven Wing  replied to  Old School Marine @7    5 months ago

Very well said. thumbs up

 
 
livefreeordie
8  livefreeordie    5 months ago

There is no such Christian teaching and anyone calling themselves a Christian or especially a pastor is demeaning and defiling the Gospel

there are no Christian civil Lawson the Bible.  The Law of Moses is obsolete for Christians per scripture

The Law of Moses does not apply to Christians

“The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is pressing into it.”  Luke 16:16 

Romans 10:3,4

 For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

Galatians 5:18

But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

Hebrews 7:22

by so much more Jesus has become a surety of a better covenant.

Hebrews 8:13

 In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

And importantly at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:22-29)

22 Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren.

23 They wrote this letter by them:

The apostles, the elders, and the brethren,

To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia:

Greetings.

24 Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law” —to whom we gave no suchcommandment— 25 it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and Fromm sexual immorality.  If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.

Farewell.

 
 
Skrekk
8.1  Skrekk  replied to  livefreeordie @8    5 months ago

So you don't want to kill Teh Gayz, you merely want them denied the same civil rights you enjoy?

 
 
Freefaller
8.2  Freefaller  replied to  livefreeordie @8    5 months ago

So he's another one of those non-christian christians?  I wonder do other organizations get free passes when one of theirs does bad?

 
 
Phoenyx13
8.2.1  Phoenyx13  replied to  Freefaller @8.2    5 months ago
So he's another one of those non-christian christians?  I wonder do other organizations get free passes when one of theirs does bad?

isn't it interesting that last week this particular poster would have proudly stood by this fellow Pastor and defended him as being religious until the day is done - but since this fellow Pastor is in the headlines for his religious views, suddenly all the "christians" are abandoning him and claiming he is now suddenly not a religious leader in the christian community (even tho this fellow Pastor in this article is still a religious leader who has plenty of people following him and a member of the same christian religion that the poster is) ??

 
 
Freefaller
8.2.2  Freefaller  replied to  Phoenyx13 @8.2.1    5 months ago

Lol it is interesting, but not surprising as it happens every damn time something similar happens

 
 
Gordy327
8.3  Gordy327  replied to  livefreeordie @8    5 months ago
there are no Christian civil Lawson the Bible. The Law of Moses is obsolete for Christians per scripture

Yeah yeah, we know Christians had to rewrite the rules for themselves because they couldn't play by the rules of the OT.

 
 
TᵢG
8.4  TᵢG  replied to  livefreeordie @8    5 months ago
The Law of Moses does not apply to Christians

Yeah, okay, but it certainly applied to ancient Hebrews, right?   Even if you take the new covenant notion to the extreme, the fact remains (the biblical fact at least) that God (the every same God of the NT) did in the OT condemn males to death if they engaged in a homosexual act.

You can argue that the omniscient, omnipotent God had a change of heart, but you cannot hide from the fact that at one point in time (biblically speaking) the God character of the Bible supported the position of this pastor regarding killing homosexuals.

 
 
livefreeordie
8.4.1  livefreeordie  replied to  TᵢG @8.4    5 months ago

Under the new covenant there is no theocratic government to carry out God’s judgments.  Nor will there be. Those laws and their punishments applied ONLY to Jews, no one else. God delays for the most part now until your death to give the judgment on sin

 
 
TᵢG
8.4.2  TᵢG  replied to  livefreeordie @8.4.1    5 months ago

You did not actually read my post.

TiG @8.4  - Yeah, okay, but it certainly applied to ancient Hebrews, right?   Even if you take the new covenant notion to the extreme, the fact remains (the biblical fact at least) that God (the every same God of the NT) did in the OT condemn males to death if they engaged in a homosexual act.

You can argue that the omniscient, omnipotent God had a change of heart, but you cannot hide from the fact that at one point in time (biblically speaking) the God character of the Bible supported the position of this pastor regarding killing homosexuals.

To wit, even if you go with the OC not applying to Christians that does not change the rules and acts of God in the past.   This pastor no doubt justifies his extreme bigotry with the notion that at one time God demanded death too.

 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
8.4.3  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @8.4.2    5 months ago

This new covenant old covenant is utter BS. A house is built on its foundation and without the OT, no one can proclaim Jesus was the Messiah. You can't refer to the parts that you like, and then not for the rest. Furthermore, Jesus never denounced being a Jew and James was very upset with what Paul who was giving up the old ways with the Greeks to get them to convert. 

Logic people.. even when talking about faith, there is still an order to things that can't be denied.

btw.. sorry, that comment was meant for LFOD

 
 
Raven Wing
8.4.4  Raven Wing  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.4.3    5 months ago
Logic people.. even when talking about faith, there is still an order to things that can't be denied.

However, that seems to be lost on some who choose to make up their own belief based upon their own choice of what they choose to believe, no matter how ar out in the boonies from the truth is may be.  

 
 
Phoenyx13
8.4.5  Phoenyx13  replied to  Raven Wing @8.4.4    5 months ago
However, that seems to be lost on some who choose to make up their own belief based upon their own choice of what they choose to believe, no matter how ar out in the boonies from the truth is may be.

but i have to admit - the mental gymnastics involved for them to justify those beliefs is simply amazing !

 
 
TᵢG
8.4.6  TᵢG  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.4.3    5 months ago
sorry, that comment was meant for LFOD

It sure was.  Winking 2

 
 
dave-2693993
8.4.7  dave-2693993  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.4.3    5 months ago
A house is built on its foundation and without the OT, no one can proclaim Jesus was the Messiah.

Rarely see those two dots connected these days.

From the Christians perspective, one was the foundation and the other the fulfillment.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.8  Bob Nelson  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.4.3    5 months ago
You can't refer to the parts that you like, and then not for the rest.

Why not?

The OT was written by many authors over many centuries. Why must it be treated as a single unit?

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.9  Bob Nelson  replied to  TᵢG @8.4    5 months ago
You can argue that the omniscient, omnipotent God had a change of heart, but you cannot hide from the fact that at one point in time (biblically speaking) the God character of the Bible supported the position of this pastor regarding killing homosexuals.

If you assume that the Bible is the literal truth.

If you assume that it is allegorical... then... no.

 
 
TᵢG
8.4.10  TᵢG  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.9    5 months ago
If you assume that the Bible is the literal truth.

"(biblically speaking)" is key.

One can analyze the Bible with a presupposition of truth and see how well it fares.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.11  Bob Nelson  replied to  TᵢG @8.4.10    5 months ago
One can analyze the Bible with a presupposition of truth and see how well it fares.

Exactly.

That's why intelligent people never "presuppose truth"...   Winking 2

 
 
TᵢG
8.4.12  TᵢG  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.11    5 months ago

I knew what you were going to say.  The only thing I could not predict is how you were going to say it.

I knew you were going to pretend that my words meant that I advocate one actually believing the presupposition rather than establishing the presupposition as a premise and see if the argument results in a contradiction.

One would have thought that "... and see how well it fares." would have eliminated any question of my meaning.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.13  Bob Nelson  replied to  TᵢG @8.4.12    5 months ago

Oh, I knew what you meant. But we know each other pretty well.

I was covering the risk that some third party might misunderstand...  peace

 
 
Hal A. Lujah
8.4.14  author  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  livefreeordie @8.4.1    5 months ago
God delays for the most part now until your death to give the judgment on sin

How convenient for Christians.  Trust us, He exists but you only will find out for sure when you cease to be alive.

 
 
Hal A. Lujah
8.4.15  author  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.9    5 months ago
If you assume that it is allegorical...

For a "divinely inspired" work, one would think that the allegories would have been derived from situations that aren't better situated for a snuff film.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.16  Bob Nelson  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @8.4.15    5 months ago

Ummm..... Hal??

It was written three fucking thousand years ago, at the end of the fucking Bronze Age.

Are you really expecting to find modern standards of behavior?

                 Eye Roll

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.17  Bob Nelson  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @8.4.14    5 months ago

That might be how a Trumpster "Christian" would argue...

A follower of Christ might say, "Don't worry about whatever may happen later. 'Love your fellows' in this life, and the rest will take care of itself."

 
 
Hal A. Lujah
8.4.18  author  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.16    5 months ago

Not offering your daughters up to total strangers for a gang raping seems like a timeless concept to me.  So doe not murdering the world, come to think of it.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.19  Bob Nelson  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @8.4.18    5 months ago
... a timeless concept...

Submission to the Master is also a timeless concept. Probably more timeless than "daughters are precious"...which isn't true everywhere even today.

I believe the word you need is "anachronism". Winking 2

 
 
Hal A. Lujah
8.4.20  author  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.19    5 months ago
Submission to the Master is also a timeless concept.

Sorry, but if I ever get the feeling that an invisible, noncommunicating entity would prefer that I hand over my daughters to be raped by strangers, I'm just not going to do it.  Not today, not 2,000 years ago, not 2 million years ago.  There is no scenario at any time in the existence of humanity when that is an appropriate response to the imagination.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.21  Bob Nelson  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @8.4.20    5 months ago

C'mon, Hal...

You know what an anachronism is. Three thousand years ago, women were chattel. Daughters were barter goods. Votive sacrifices were normal practice.

Things have changed since then, but the present is irrelevant to the past.

 
 
Hal A. Lujah
8.4.22  author  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.21    5 months ago
Three thousand years ago, women were chattel. Daughters were barter goods.

All the more reason to never, ever look to 3,000 year old dogma for insights of how to be a better human being.

 
 
livefreeordie
8.4.23  livefreeordie  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.4.3    5 months ago

Perrie you must have a different Tanakh

Hinei, the days come, saith Hashem, that I will cut a Brit Chadasha with Bais Yisroel, and with Bais Yehudah; Not according to the Brit that I cut with their Avot in the day that I took hold of their yad to take them out of Eretz Mitzrayim; which My Brit they broke, although I was Ba’al (Husband) to them, saith Hashem; But this shall be the Brit that I will cut with Bais Yisroel; After those days, saith Hashem, I will set My Torah in them inwardly, and I will write ketuvim on their hearts; and I will be their Elohim, and they shall be My People. And they shall teach no more every ish his re’a (neighbor), and every ish his brother, saying, Know Hashem; for they shall all have da’as of Me, from the katon of them unto the gadol of them, saith Hashem; for I will forgive their avon, and I will remember their chattat no more.
Yirmeyah 31:31-34 

Or from the Messianic Jewish Bible

“Here, the days are coming,” says Adonai, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Isra’el and with the house of Y’hudah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers on the day I took them by their hand and brought them out of the land of Egypt; because they, for their part, violated my covenant, even though I, for my part, was a husband to them,” says Adonai. “For this is the covenant I will make with the house of Isra’el after those days,” says Adonai: “I will put my Torah within them and write it on their hearts; I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will any of them teach his fellow community member or his brother, ‘Know Adonai’; for all will know me, from the least of them to the greatest; because I will forgive their wickednesses and remember their sins no more.”
Jeremiah 31:30-33

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.24  Bob Nelson  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @8.4.22    5 months ago
All the more reason to never, ever look to 3,000 year old dogma for insights of how to be a better human being.

There are episodes that are worth retaining, but others that certainly are not.

Basically, we cannot subcontract our morality to anyone, alive or dead. We may take advice from wherever... but we remain responsible for our actions.

 
 
Skrekk
8.4.25  Skrekk  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.19    5 months ago
Submission to the Master is also a timeless concept.

That's one of core aspects of Christianity and related superstitions which I find most objectionable.

.

You know what an anachronism is. Three thousand years ago, women were chattel. Daughters were barter goods. Votive sacrifices were normal practice.

In other words the good old days, a very sound foundation for an ideology.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.26  Bob Nelson  replied to  Skrekk @8.4.25    5 months ago
That's one of core aspects of Christianity...

That's an anachronism, too. The condition of women was similar all across the world back then.

In other words the good old days, a very sound foundation for an ideology.

Again, you're spotlighting Christianity, but the phenomenon is worldwide, and goes back to caveman days. Our efforts to give women equality are unique in human history. An anomaly.

So while you may criticize whatever you wish... singling out Christianity here just weakens your argument.

 
 
Skrekk
8.4.27  Skrekk  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.26    5 months ago
That's an anachronism, too. The condition of women was similar all across the world back then.

Actually I was referring to the master-slave relationship inherent in a Christian's relationship to his sky fairy, but you're right that these superstitions also perpetuated Bronze-age misogyny far longer than it should have been.    Heck, some states permitted marital rape until 1993.....and some time after that Trump's attorney said that it wasn't even possible for a man to rape his wife.    And there are still enough people who hold those views that we have a pussy grabber as Prez.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.28  Bob Nelson  replied to  Skrekk @8.4.27    5 months ago
Actually I was referring to the master-slave relationship inherent in a Christian's relationship to his sky fairy...

Apparently you don't know much about Christianity, and are satisfied with what you (imagine that you) know.

Be happy.

 
 
Phoenyx13
8.4.29  Phoenyx13  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.28    5 months ago

Apparently you don't know much about Christianity, and are satisfied with what you (imagine that you) know.

Be happy.

does someone worship their "equal" or does someone worship their "master" ?

 
 
Gordy327
8.4.30  Gordy327  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.28    5 months ago
Apparently you don't know much about Christianity, and are satisfied with what you (imagine that you) know.

He's not wrong. 

 
 
Skrekk
8.4.31  Skrekk  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.28    5 months ago
Apparently you don't know much about Christianity, and are satisfied with what you (imagine that you) know.

Who's your "Lord", Bob?    The language of all the Abrahamic sects is filled with that kind of subservient crap.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.32  Bob Nelson  replied to  Phoenyx13 @8.4.29    5 months ago

does someone worship their "equal" or does someone worship their "master" ?

I don't answer closed questions. The topic of "worship" is a bit more complex than just two options.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.33  Bob Nelson  replied to  Gordy327 @8.4.30    5 months ago
He's not wrong.

I think he is profoundly wrong... but that's his problem, not mine. I'm not a missionary.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.34  Bob Nelson  replied to  Skrekk @8.4.31    5 months ago

Why are you being purposefully unpleasant, Skrekk? Are you trying to ensure that we don't converse... exchange... discuss...

Why?

If you'd like to discuss... any topic... I'll be glad to collaborate. If you don't want to discuss... that's OK, too.

It's up to you.

 
 
TᵢG
8.4.35  TᵢG  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.34    5 months ago

Let Skrekk know your beliefs.   When you come across as a Bible believer (and you know that is the interpretation when you do not qualify) you should expect people to react accordingly.

Let Skrekk know that you do not believe the Bible is divine and that you are an agnostic theist Christian who defines Christianity as -in effect- 'adopting the good parts of the philosophy attributed to Jesus Christ'.

I suspect this would  dramatically improve your ability to discuss Christianity with Skrekk, et. al.

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.36  Bob Nelson  replied to  TᵢG @8.4.35    5 months ago
I suspect this would  dramatically improve your ability to discuss Christianity with Skrekk, et. al.

I'm sure you're right.

exhausted.gifBut as you know, I have serious anger-management problems. When aggressed, my immediate reflex is to smack down the aggressor.

I'm working on it...

For the moment, about the best I can do is disengage.

 
 
Phoenyx13
8.4.37  Phoenyx13  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.32    5 months ago
I don't answer closed questions.

shocking /s

maybe the answer is a bit uncomfortable, eh ?

The topic of "worship" is a bit more complex than just two options.

oh good - please provide the other "options". Thanks :)

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.38  Bob Nelson  replied to  Phoenyx13 @8.4.37    5 months ago

What part of "I don't answer closed questions" did you not understand?    Giggle

 
 
Phoenyx13
8.4.39  Phoenyx13  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.38    5 months ago

What part of "I don't answer closed questions" did you not understand? 

golly gee.. .if you only read my post and provided the "other options" for worship, then it wouldn't be a "closed" question, now would it ? Face Palm  (do i have to state that it's simply pathetic that i have to explain this to you ?)

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.40  Bob Nelson  replied to  Phoenyx13 @8.4.39    5 months ago

It seems that you actually do not understand... So let's dissect your post.


I don't answer closed questions.

shocking /s

maybe the answer is a bit uncomfortable, eh ?

The topic of "worship" is a bit more complex than just two options.

oh good - please provide the other "options". Thanks :)


shocking /s
   You begin with an aggressive demonstration of your disagreement. Sarcasm is aggressive. I use it a lot...

maybe the answer is a bit uncomfortable, eh ?
   Then you demonstrate that you've already come to a conclusion... so it's really pointless for me to answer at all.

oh good - please provide the other "options". Thanks :)
   Finally, you laughingly ask a question that is boundless. Such a question is just as unanswerable as "Have you stopped beating your wife?"


I'm guessing that you don't actually wish to discuss anything, but being an eternal optimist, I'm always affording another opportunity.

If you want to discuss something:
 - A conversation is a collaboration, requiring an effort of construction from both parties.
 - If you are not polite, you're signalling that whatever else you may say, you really aren't interested.
 - Begin by agreeing on vocabulary. Differences in usage ensure differences in results.
 - Do not insult the other person's ideas, which is the same as insulting the person. An instant end to collaboration.

Have a nice day..........

 
 
Phoenyx13
8.4.41  Phoenyx13  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.40    4 months ago

Yes, let's dissect, shall we ? you seem a bit off in your dissection (which is no surprise really)

shocking /s 
   You begin with an aggressive demonstration of your disagreement. Sarcasm is aggressive. I use it a lot...

just a response to "i don't answer closed questions" which is rather aggressive and gives a standoffish attitude - if you give aggressive, you will get it in return. Sarcasm is a great thing, eh ? :)

maybe the answer is abit uncomfortable, eh ?
   Then you demonstrate that you'vealreadycome to a conclusion... so it's really pointless for me to answer at all.

ah, here's the misconception - you think i already have a conclusion. I don't. I have an idea of a possible conclusion (did you see the word "possible" ?) which would be uncomfortable for you. This is why i state that "maybe" the answer is a bit uncomfortable, of course you could have a different answer altogether which wouldn't be uncomfortable at all and i leave it open to that possibility - unlike you apparently who thinks he already knows what i'm thinking.

oh good - pleaseprovide the other "options". Thanks
   Finally, youlaughinglyask a question that is boundless. Such a question is just as unanswerable as "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

so you are unable to provide other options for "worship" besides the two that i have laid out for you ? if this is the case then all you had to do was say so. The question isn't boundless - there are only a finite number of possibilities for reasons for worshiping someone or some entity or some thing. This looks like a way for you to avoid answering the question, usually tactics like this are done out of fear of the answer - is this your case as well ?


I'm guessing that you don't actually wish to discuss anything, but being an eternal optimist, I'm always affording another opportunity.

If you want todiscusssomething:
 - A conversation is acollaboration, requiring an effort ofconstructionfrom both parties.
 - If you are not polite, you're signalling that whatever else you may say, you really aren't interested.
 - Begin by agreeing on vocabulary. Differences in usage ensure differences in results.
 - Do not insult the other person's ideas, which is the same as insulting the person. An instant end to collaboration.

Have a nice day..........

yes, it requires both sides - which includes yours and so far you are the one who has been uncooperative and has assumed a lot (which i have corrected). If you don't feel i'm polite - that would be your issue, not mine. I deal with polite and impolite all the time on here - makes no difference to me, i can still be an adult and have a discussion with impolite people as well, it's not that difficult if you are in it to have a discussion. 

Again - please provide the other options for "worship" besides:

1. Worshiping your "master"

2. Worshiping your "equal" (which i'm not sure you "worship" your "equal" - the act of worshiping is reserved for people or deities that you feel are "above" you, not your equal)

now, if you have other options you'd like to provide and be an adult by having a discussion - that'd be great. If you'd rather not discuss anything because it's too uncomfortable for you while simultaneously blaming everything on me - that's your decision to deceive yourself.

Have a great day ! :)

 
 
Bob Nelson
8.4.42  Bob Nelson  replied to  Phoenyx13 @8.4.41    4 months ago

   Giggle

 
 
Phoenyx13
8.4.43  Phoenyx13  replied to  Bob Nelson @8.4.42    4 months ago

laughing dude and you want a discussion ?? laughing dude sorry, i won't take the blame for your inability to have a discussion :) Makes No Sense

 
 
devangelical
9  devangelical    5 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
livefreeordie
9.1  livefreeordie  replied to  devangelical @9    5 months ago

Not much change because there are so few

 
 
epistte
9.1.1  epistte  replied to  livefreeordie @9.1    5 months ago

You obviously have a different definition of what a dominionist is that many other people do.  I know more than a few nitwits who claim that the US was created as a Christian county and that the Bible is the basis of US law. David Barton readers eat that nonsense up. 

 
 
Skrekk
9.1.2  Skrekk  replied to  epistte @9.1.1    5 months ago
......a few nitwits who claim that the US was created as a Christian county and that the Bible is the basis of US law.

In fact that's exactly what Larry claims.

 
 
Gordy327
9.1.3  Gordy327  replied to  Skrekk @9.1.2    5 months ago

Anyone who makes  such claims is flat out wrong too. But then, it's mostly christian dominionists or apologetics who make such claims.

 
 
MrFrost
10  MrFrost    5 months ago

This has to be the least 'Christlike' Christian I have ever seen. What a jackass. 

 
 
epistte
10.1  epistte  replied to  MrFrost @10    5 months ago

For someone who is so obsessed with the sex lives of others, I bet that he has an account on Grindr.

 
 
MrFrost
10.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  epistte @10.1    5 months ago

Probably AFF too. 

 
 
epistte
10.1.2  epistte  replied to  MrFrost @10.1.1    5 months ago

I forgot about that site. It an even scummier version of Ashley Madison.

 
 
Skrekk
10.1.3  Skrekk  replied to  MrFrost @10.1.1    5 months ago
Probably AFF too.

Americans for Freedums?

 
 
epistte
10.1.4  epistte  replied to  Skrekk @10.1.3    5 months ago

Adult Friend Finder.

 
 
Kathleen
11  Kathleen    5 months ago

Some people you just have to act like they don't exist.

 
 
Raven Wing
11.1  Raven Wing  replied to  Kathleen @11    5 months ago

I feel terrible for those he is preaching his BS to. Especially their children. Hopefully, they will learn the truth when they are older.

 
 
Kathleen
11.1.1  Kathleen  replied to  Raven Wing @11.1    5 months ago

I feel really bad for the children too.

 
 
GregTx
12  GregTx    5 months ago

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Jasper2529
Freefaller
Sunshine
pat wilson
Jerry Verlinger


46 visitors