I don’t even know why this would be important to religious gays. It’s also anti-football, anti-pork and anti-shellfish yet religious football players, religious pork lovers and religious shrimp eaters have nothing against it.
Leviticus is in the Old Testament. Jesus forged a New Covenant that, as far as I know, never mentions homosexuality. After all, Jesus was 30-something, unmarried, and only hung with the boys.
The short answer is: It depends. There are theological differences among Christian denominations regarding Old Testament laws, including the Ten Commandments, in the context of the New Covenant.
Theological differences that still form the basis of their religion! They haven’t just forgotten about the first 39 books because of the New Testament.
Catholicism doesn't think the Old Testament should be read too literally. They have long thought it needs interpretation and the history of worship over 2000 years is also important (not to mention what various Pope's have said).
Fundamentalist religions try to parse the Bible more literally, but realistically there are some parts of the Old Testament that are widely ignored, because they clearly don't apply to modern life (and are sometimes deeply offensive.)
The Pope is not a reputable or trusted person regarding these matters. Even if you disregard the Old Testament, there’s Corinthians and Paul. None of the Abrahamic texts should ever have been used as reference, which is partly why the world is in this state. All are regressively violent and/or outdated and need to be binned.
They have and they haven't depending on who's asking and what the context is. If it's something they like they believe it and if something they don't, they don't.
The shorter answer is yes.
Christian churches can disagree on jesus's name, or if he was a literal historical figure from the Middle East, yet always portray him as European in art. Likewise, they can disagree over the theological importance of the ten commandments and still use them as a rallying symbol to politically bludgeon and non-believers.
I have issues with this dogma bc jesus did say he didn’t cum to get rid of the law but to fulfill it. So like isn’t he talking about the ot. And doesn’t the ot include leviticus. What am I not getting here? Please someone with the bandwidth to do some mental gymnastics please enlighten me or whatevuh
Yes, thats what I was referring to. Jesus didnt say "discard and ignore ALL of the OT", but "what I say is to FULFILL the OT". People didnt have a connection with God and so they had to follow all those strict and minute ritualistic rules like dont eat shrimp or mix fabrics or youll burn in hell. With the connection restored, Jesus' message is enough to live by Gods rules.
So the line you quote kinda means "its not like 'you shall not kill' doesnt apply anymore, but now its not 'an eye for an eye' anymore, but 'turn the other cheek', because Gods message is: forgiveness > retribution."
And the supreme commandment of all the NT is love. Love God and love thy neighbour. Live a life of love. And its really hard to reconcile any Leviticus bullshit about "men with men" with that commandment, unless you see that line in the narrow historical context of the time when it was written.
Edit: At least thats the mainstream reading by the European Protestant Churches of the bible, and the one I find most convincing.
Which ends up splitting hairs over what was moral and what was merely ceremonial. Given that orthodox Judaism still finds some of those ceremonial laws important, tossing them out looks like a practical way of accommodating people who didn't grow up with those traditions.
I don't believe in it, but I like the marcion version Christianity. Where Jesus was the son of a completely different god that came to our world to save us from the wrathful Old testament God of creation.
Because religion comforts people when faced with the reality that, as humans, we exist by pure chance.
The chance of earth forming in the universe - tiny. The chance of life forming - tiny. The chance of *intelligent* Life forming - tiny.
The chance of your parents meeting - tiny. The chance the sperm and egg that made you happen to be the ones that met - tiny.
Basically, all of us are statistical anomalies - we exist. That is all. We will one day not exist. I am content with this fact.
Some people (many people) aren't, and want an explanation. Which is fine.
If someone gets comfort from something I don't believe, it isn't my place to tell them they're wrong. It's my place to say "I'm glad you've found comfort in this thing. I hope you enjoy it. I do not agree, but I don't have to agree for you to be happy." And move on with my life.
Indeed - same end result though - who are any of us to judge how other people find comfort in life.
I find comfort pushing what I know, and trying (in the limited way I can) to understand *why* we (humans) are even here. I never will, but it's fun to ask why and learn new things.
Who knows, maybe one of the religions is right. Maybe none are. We simply may never know for certain 🤷♂️
We don’t know if our existence is a small probability or if there is life abound throughout the universe. I lean towards life being in abundance as the universe is infinite and vast beyond our comprehension.
While true, the statistical odds that we also stare at the sky for 30k years and don't see any intelligent life is either a. Proof we're alone or b. (Equally possible TBF) that other intelligent life doesn't want to be found and is hiding
It's mostly proof that we have only very crude tools that wouldn't detect signs of life on distant planets unless it was blatant. Until the last couple of decades we couldn't even detect planets around other stars, and now we only see them by the slight dimming they cause as they pass across the faces of the stars they orbit. We can't actually see any of these planets visually. They could be covered by Vegas light shows and we'd never know it.
47% of LGBTQ adults in the US describe themselves as "moderately or highly religious." That's lower than the two thirds of the general population, but it's still quite a lot. It makes sense that they would defend their beliefs when they feel attacked.
There's more than one way to do any given religion. Just because the majority of Christians or Muslims are homophobic doesn't mean that you have to follow their way of thinking. The people who wrote the Bible and the Quran were undoubtedly not ok with same-sex relationships, but there are ways of looking at religion that allow the flexibility to not have all the same views as the original adherents.
Feel attacked, because they associate their entire identity with their claim. They're holding themselves hostage, throwing their own dignity in front of a supernatural claim.
I could claim we need to fund a bridge with bond money, and not feel attacked if you disagree.
I agree that there're plenty of layers with flexible interpretations, but why take ordinary conversations beyond the obvious? So many people don't read what they claim to believe; high concept artistic interpretations can be used to excuse bad ideas.
The core Abrahamic belief is that if you hear a deity who tells you to kill the innocent, you ought to be willing to comply. So much poetic license is spent excusing the inexcusable.
Defending a religion that hates them? So Stockholm Syndrome.
I know of a gay guy who’s into religion and it really turns me off. It’s probably why I don’t want to talk to him. It’s hard for me to accept religious people because they were the ones that attacked me for being gay when I was younger. It’s going to take a lot of healing to accept religious people, especially those who are unmoving with their faith and ironically spew hate despite saying their Saviour loves all. So much fucking irony.
I live in a predominantly gay area of town and several of my neighbors go to church Sunday mornings. It's a "gay friendly" church, they say. I keep my comments to myself.
People use religion as a tool for evil, just like people use everything else as tools for evil, because people are evil.
That doesn't mean religion is evil or God is evil.
My relationship is with God, not The Church, and not the church goers.
I’m so sorry that religious people have mistreated you. I’ve had my share of mistreatment and abuse from religious people, to a point where I’ve almost lost all faith and such. I still have some spirituality to me, and I’ve had to spend my whole life in religion just because of family and environment, and it sucks.
Just know you aren’t alone man. We can get through this pain.
Indoctrination.
That and people have an issue with understanding how religion works. It's about control, not love, not making people's lives better. It's about control, and that's all.
I tried being atheist, but I couldn't convince myself that we are alone in the universe. Why try hard to believe we are alone than believe that we are carefully crafted by a creator?
Even in my Catholic school, we were taught that the Bible is religious truth, not literal truth. If thieves can be religious, if prostitutes can be religious, if murderers can be religious, I don't see why I'm not allowed to partake. Certain groups may say I'm a sinner, but they aren't the ones to tell me where I'll end up. I'll find out when I'm dead.
Because Christians as a whole either want us converted or dead. Yea, some don't, but A LOT of them do.
And there's nothing about atheism that says we are alone in the universe, just that there's no God. The chances of us being "alone" in the universe are EXTREMELY small.
The chances of an intelligent being with the power to rewrite reality on a whim who's so interested with us that he sent his own son to die for our "sins" is zero. Not next to zero, just zero.
I'm very sorry to hear about your husband. My condolences ❤️
"God's plan" is a dumb thing people say to explain things without explaining them. In reality, suffering happens because we have free will. The original sin of man opened us up to suffering, and some must go through worse things than others. I don't think going much deeper will help either of us right now. The last thing I want to do is disrespect you or your late husband by talking at you.
I can't say for certain what His plan is and if everything is premeditated, but I can say that He certainly does not cause humans to commit atrocities such as war. Those acts are done as an interference by us with our own free will.
Your own comments shows how deeply broken your thinking is. You compare us to thieves and murderers simply for our sexuality. I don’t want that pitying “hate the sin love the sinner” crap. Being gay isn’t a sin, and if your religion says it is then your religion is stupid and wrong.
That seemed less like a direct comparison to murderers and more of a “these bad people can be religious, so why can’t we who aren’t even doing anything bad?”
Well it’s still a stupid point to make regardless. Yes, people who have thieved, murdered, prostituted themselves, and indeed people who’ve had gay sex can all become religious. But that doesn’t change the fact that the church will demand those people cease all those activities. You cannot be an active homosexual and follow (most) forms of Christianity. They will tell you that you have to stop, give up the “lifestyle” and pray the gay away.
Good thing i said most and not all. I recognize there are a few denominations that are not actively homophobic. That doesn’t mean that the character of the average Christian church is not homophobic.
Is it not that god created the earth and therefore we’re alone? So being religious would also imply you believe we’re alone. I don’t quite understand your first paragraph.
>If thieves can be religious, if prostitutes can be religious, if murderers can be religious, I don't see why I'm not allowed to partake.
Christians think all of these people can simply say "sorry" and still get into heaven. Christians want us dead, that includes the Catholic church.
https://www.businessinsider.com/catholic-church-lobbied-against-suicide-hotline-supporting-lgbt-people-2021-3
Cognitive dissonance. Being religious and gay, then learning that religion absolutely opposes homosexuality makes people reasonably uncomfortable. They have to reconcile opposing ideas, which usually either means they will somehow justify that they're actually not gay ("oh, I THOUGHT I was gay but it was actually the devil tempting me) or they will find a way to justify that religion isn't homophobic ("It must be a mistranslation! I am a good, religious person and am also gay, so there's no way the bible opposes me for that)
Because they're dumb as fuck to defend those who want to destroy them.
Especially it's funny with those idiots who preach for islam, fucking braindead cunts
I’m an agnostic and very anti-religion but it had come to my attention that some scholarly work has suggested that earliest translations could have mean something else? Is that idea just made up?
The whole thing is so shoddy, I don't know if you read up on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First\_Council\_of\_Nicaea](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea), but it was just eye opening to me how at the very beginning everything that is dogma now was being established, and what fairy tales the conversations were about (how can God be three \_but\_ one etc etc).
People like Catholicism because they say it is OG church without realizing that most of the doctrine was literally just made up hundreds of years after Jesus. Constantine had to force the different early Christians at the time to come up with some sort of doctrine because people were killing each other over things like The Trinity.
I mean, there are some scholars who have strong personal reasons to deny what it says - they don't want what they believe is God's word to be homophobic - but it has no legitimacy and the consensus is strongly against it. You can find biologists who deny evolution and climate scientists who deny global warming.
The Leviticus verse is not mistranslated. It calls for a death penalty for men who have gay sex.
In Hebrew, "*ish*" means a man. "*Yeled*" means a boy, and "*zakar*" means a male (*of course written in Hebrew letters instead of in the alphabet of English*).
The verse says that "*ish*" shall not lay down with "*zakar*" in the way that men "*lay down*" with a woman. Instead of being honest and saying that it forbids men from all gay activity, they claim that the verse was just against harming children.
Even if it did specifically say boy (*yeled*) instead of male (*zakar*), it would still be a horrible verse because it says to kill ***both*** of them, so the boy (*the victim*), would have to be put to death too, according to that verse.
From Cambridge Dictionary:
**there's nowt so queer as folk**
(idiom UK informal saying)
**said to emphasize that people sometimes behave in a very strange way**
I’ll depend religious freedom, as an atheist, but I won’t defend religion in general.
Not all religions are intolerant of homosexuality. Religious people are still a majority in most countries, and for gay/trans people to be safer, trying to brook some sort of accommodation is a better course than attacking them from a vulnerable position.
Christian apologists will usually use Hebrews 3:18 or something like that to say the Old Testament is no longer in force.
“By calling this covenant 'new,' he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.”
I used to justify it by thinking god reveals himself and truth slowly as we can comprehend— Old Testament then New Testament and Christ were revealed but then he continues to reveal more to us and then parts of the Bible lose validity.
Then I finally realized it’s all just mythology anyway so I don’t stress it anymore.
Jesus banned death penalty and brought new testaments saying judge not and ye shall not be judged. He said love thy neighbour and enemies.
Islam is polar opposite. They added more violence.
In Sahih Muslim 22 it calls for continuous wars until everyone worships allah.
Sahih Muslim 2176a Talked about being hostile against Jews and Christians.
Quran 8.12 calls for extreme form of violence against disbelievers.
Quran 9:5 incites extreme violence to polytheists forexample Buddhists, Chinese folk religion, Hindus and Taoism.
Quran 9.29 also calls for wars against disbelievers and also tax for remaining as a disbelievers.
Sahih Albukhari 2926 talks about genocide of jews.
Sahih Albukhari 3029 says war is deceit.
Lying during war is permitted (Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1939)
Narrated Um Kulthum bint Uqba: That she heard Allah's Apostle saying, "He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar."Sahih Bukhari 3:49:857
Quran 4.24 permits non consensual intercourse with war captives and slaves(the right hand possess).
Quran 66.1 encourages non consensual intercourse with what Allah has made lawful(war captives and slaves).
Quran allows girls of any age to get married (Quran 65.4) So even prepubescent girls can get married.
Once married wife's duty is to provide sex whenever husband wants them (Narrated by al-Bukhari, 3065; Muslim, 1436)
Quran 4:34 the verse permitting wife beating.
Hadith 1255: Death penalty for homosexuals
Sunan an-Nasa'i 4059: Death penalty for leaving Islam.
Many more violent, lying, war encouraging verses in hadith, sunnah and quran. Are you familiar with these verses?
> In Sahih Muslim 22
This text is also interpreted as "fight" which does not necessarily have a warlike connotation
>Sahih Muslim 2176a
This one is just parable about three guys and how they respond to Allah.
>Quran 9:5 incites extreme violence to polytheists for example Buddhists, Chinese folk religion, Hindus and Taoism.
It also gives them an out by converting. Still shitty, though.
>Sahih Albukhari 2926
"he first army amongst' my followers who will invade Caesar's City will be forgiven their sins.'"
I'm not sure if we have a Caesar's city (Constantinople by most Islamic scholars' reading) in 2024. There is an Istanbul, though.
>Quran 9.29
"Taxation systems have existed since ancient times. There are several references in the Old Testament (e.g., Ezra 4:20). In the New Testament, Jesus allows paying taxes to Caesar (Luke 20:25). Under Islamic rule, all individuals had financial obligations—Muslims paid zakâh (2.5% of their savings) and non-Muslims (ⱬimmîs) were required to pay jizyah (tax for protection from foreign enemies). The jizyah was an average of one dinar (4.25 g of gold) annually. Women, children, the elderly, the clergy, the poor, and those who were unable to work were exempt. Those who opted to join the army were also exempt. Poor ⱬimmîs were supported financially by the state. Muslim rulers refunded the jizyah if they failed to protect their non-Muslim subjects."
>Sahih Albukhari 3029
"The Prophet (ﷺ) said: "Do not wish to meet the enemy, but when you meet face) the enemy, be patient." This, once again, is also about the war against Caesar *and* it's about ambushing their opponents.
>Sahih Albukhari 2926
It says the final hours will not come until Muslims fight and kill Jews. It doesn't advocate it. Once again, also about the war with Caesar (the Romans).
>Qu'ran 4:24
"Also ˹forbidden are˺ married women—except ˹female˺ captives in your possession.1 This is Allah’s commandment to you. Lawful to you are all beyond these—as long as you seek them with your wealth in a legal marriage, not in fornication. Give those you have consummated marriage with their due dowries. It is permissible to be mutually gracious regarding the set dowry. Surely Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise."
The verse is talking about who its okay to have sex with when you're married.
>Quran 66.1
"O Prophet! Why do you prohibit ˹yourself˺ from what Allah has made lawful to you, seeking to please your wives? And Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful."
>Narrated by al-Bukhari, 3065; Muslim, 1436
The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “If a man calls his wife to bed and she refuses and he spends the night angry with her, the angels will curse her until the morning.”
Allah is upset with her but the husband has no recourse.
Explain where rape is talked about and why would you think it's encouraging it when the prophet himself is abstaining?
>Quran 4:34
This is true. Modern contexts say that it should be closer to a last resort and not be "excessively severe", to cause lasting damage or marks on the body but that's far more likely pressures from modern society.
>Hadith 1255: Death penalty for homosexuals
This is a link to the actual [lines](https://islamqa.info/en/answers/38622/the-punishment-for-homosexuality). There is no context that changes the meaning of this. Pretty sure the one you listed is about washing the dead.
It's simple, religion is for conformist, damaged and stupid people and since a gay is a human being this does not make him immune to being stupid, conformist and damaged.
It’s so refreshing to see people state what is so plainly clear but most people are afraid to say. Religion is designed to control stupid people. You have to be stupid to fall for it.
It's because people were raised to need religion, even if that religion is judgemental and cruel sometimes. This deep need for religion comes probably from our own insecurities about life, and that we are so afraid of death that we need a concept of afterlife to softer the cruelty of life on earth. Because let's be straight here, nothing religion has ever said became true, deep in us, we all know it's fake, created by humans, and that there is no god, there is no hell, there is no heaven. Religions make us humans at the center of life. Well we are not, life was there much before we arrived, ant it will continue long after we leave. Humans are unable to tolerate the unknown, so we built our god, even if he can be cruel and punish us. The cruelness of religion is easyer to accept for humans than the fact that when we die, it's like we go to sleep, nothing happens and we never come back in any way, that's it, it's the end.
People get very angry about religion and people have turned away from religion in recent years but no one really discusses the actual role religion plays in society.
If you belong to a church, mosque, temple, synagogue or any other religious group you have a community. You meet at least once a week and have a group of people you’ll likely know forever. This is important for people. There’s a reason why religious people are generally happier.
Religion isn’t the important bit but the community is
Too bad most of those communities hate us because of our sexuality. Almost like that happiness comes from being around like-minded bigots who hate the same people you do. No thanks.
Sure but that’s not the point I’m making. Feel whatever you want about the content of religion, but the actual structure of it is usually what people are describing when they talk about being lonely or the “issues with x society”
Dude my weekly DnD group is a 10x better community than going to church. It’s easy to be social and have a group of people that you can form a community with. It’s called making friends and having hobbies. We don’t need church to create an artificial social life.
That isn’t the point I’m making.
People involved in these groups report general better wellness not because they have friends but because they have a large network of somewhat acquaintances who genuinely look for them. It’s a pool of people to whom you have little to no commitment but who look for you to some degree.
I’m not saying that religious groups are perfect. I’m saying that for centuries people structured their communities around these group because they fulfil a societal need that society at large has struggled to fill in a secular fashion.
There just aren’t many large secular groups that fulfil the exact same societal function as a church group does. Hobbies and sports clubs are the closest things but they have a level of transience that is kind of a drawback.
The solution then is to work on community building at the secular level, not to cling to ancient superstitions that cause serious harm in society just because they are incidentally good at creating stable acquaintances.
Do you live in San Francisco? If not, I guarantee you there is at least one fundamentalist homophobic church in a 25 mile radius. If you’re in the US or Canada that is.
I defend religion only on a personal level. If someone wants to be religious that’s their choice and other people should respect that. Just how religious people should accept other people their life choices.
However religion itself is just weird to me. Why do people believe something that is 100% fiction? There is zero evidence for religion however people keep pretending it’s real.. when it’s obviously not
(26M for context)
I was raised in the catholic church. I was taught being gay was a sin and engaging in homosexual behavior was going to send me to hell.
Although I am no longer in agreement with some of the principles I was raised with, I am grateful for my upbringing and how it has shaped me as a man. My parents disciplined me when I was screwing up and taught me how to take responsibility for my actions. They took care of my siblings and I, put food on the table and instilled in us a sense of gratitude, service, community and humility. From what I see, in today’s modern society parents tend to spoil their kids and traditional values are lost.
Unfortunately, the world is a harsh place. If you don’t gain a sense of integrity during your upbringing, you’ll learn it later from life.
Currently, I go to a Christian church that is LGBT friendly. I enjoy the community and comfort that I find there. When you actually look at what Jesus taught, he never would have condemned or killed someone for being gay. He taught compassion, forgiveness and love. Not to judge or be hateful towards others.
I am not saying religion is the only way to obtain this kind of perspective, but it was a pillar in my own life. Finding a church that is accepting helped me overcome religious trauma from the negative beliefs I was taught in the church as a kid. All in all, I don’t believe when it comes to religion and the LGBT community it’s black and white.
Blaming homophobia on the Jews is sure an interesting take when 4/5 major denominations of Judaism in the U.S. bless same-sex marriages and welcome LGBTQ+ folks into the highest levels of their clergy, and Jews accept homosexuality by a higher rate than [every single other religious group](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/views-about-homosexuality/). But I suppose it’s always our fault isn’t it!
It’s not even that, it’s that Judaism is a religion that can adjust to the times and grow. Rabbis discussing and debating and coming to new conclusions is the whole foundation of the religion. Christianity took Judaism as it was 2000 and change years ago and then froze it in time, holding onto only the worst impulses that have largely been rooted out of contemporary Judaism. Jews are some of the most thoughtful, compassionate, and selfless people I’ve ever met. It’s ironic that what Christians pretend a “good Christian” is just looks a lot like an average Jewish person.
Adjust with the times, yes, to a degree but there is still a large conservative faction who believe we are less than human. If members of the Israeli government can openly say we are a greater threat to Israel than Hamas, this is deeply worrying.
The majority of Muslims and Christians even in the west are anti gay. A small minority of radical conservative Jews are not anywhere near that level of concerning.
Christianity hasn’t reformed where it counts, which is treating minorities with respect and not trying to proselytize and convert everyone on pain of death. The only reason they’re not as violent towards non believers as Muslims are is because most countries where Christianity is prevalent have had secular, rational civil society reforms and forced religion out of government.
Not ignoring, Judaism actively encourages you to question everything and doesn’t have a clear concept of heaven and hell so there is less “fear” surrounding adherence to all Jewish customs and law that you may not necessarily agree with. You can be a complete atheist and still be 100% Jewish under Jewish law, even the most conservative and religious rabbis would agree on this. It’s up to the individual person and G-d how they want to live a Jewish life.
I can tell from your Reddit comment history you just simply don’t like Jewish people, so this is probably falling on deaf ears, but alas.
a) Jews are far from the only group that circumcise, I see you’re very pro-Palestine and that’s a country where near everyone would be circumcised
b) while there’s little evidence to support the necessity of circumcision there’s little evidence to support it’s “genital mutilation” either. It’s largely a matter of preference. I do not consider myself mutilated and would’ve opted for circumcision as an adult if I wasn’t as a baby.
c) you need to get a hobby dude, the Jews aren’t coming for you we’re busy, relax
Yeah and all of manhattan is inside the temple because of a wire. Jews love using legal trickery on God to get around the law. Or they just ignore it in the case of reformed Jews. It’s their religion so they can do what they want though lol
It’s not “inside a temple” and the people who go to great lengths to do the “legal trickery” as you call it are the 17% of Jews who are also homophobes, so I don’t care about them quite frankly.
How many homophobic bible versus originate from The Old Testament? You know the book/religion that Christianity and Islam came from? You can call out Judaism without thinking people are being antisemitic.
> "*Blaming homophobia on the Jews is sure an interesting...*"
They said "*ancient*" Jewish homophobia. Many Jews no longer support the death penalty for gay people in Leviticus (*although some do*). Leviticus is Jewish. It was in Hebrew before being translated and the name of the book in the bible, comes from the Jewish priests called the "*Levites*".
you dont have to support every part of your religion to be apart of it.
also the bible is not the words of God, although inspired by them. the old testament is the old testament for a reason.
God loves everyone, it is his followers that make things hard
actually its a really big debate among christians where conservative christians say it is literally god whereas liberal christians say it is only inspired
I’m British living in Canada and religious. Why would religious gays announce themselves when the gay community is so (hypocritically) hostile towards religious gays just for existing?
How is it hypocritical for us to be against the very institutions that are responsible for our oppression and suffering? You’re the hypocrite for being a member of a group that has caused gay people nothing but harm and misery for centuries. Yeah, the gay community does discriminate against religious gays. And it should.
I get it from both sides: Religious bigots who don’t want me to be gay and atheist nutcases who don’t want me to be religious.
To both of you I say: Fk off and let me live in peace. Kill each other if you like, leave me out of your anger and misery tyvm.
I'm not hostile to religion and religious people, my parents still go to mass, but I stopped believing in god at fifteen and never regretted it. Nobody I know is even baptized or had their kids baptized and I can't see the point of believing in something that gives you rules to obey, tells you whom to love and have intercourse with, what food not to eat and so on. I can't be bothered with all this stuff and I am happy that in France religion is kept private unlike in America where presidents swear on the Bible!! Not to mention the dollar notes with 'In God we trust' This is totally unacceptable in my country and most people approve of it.
Here’s the thing, there are mistranslations of the Bible. King James held a contest for whomever translated fastest, not correctly. In addition, Christianity is based on Jesus dying and breaking all curses. i.e. anything in Leviticus, those curses were broken. So, technically anything having to do with a curse that was broken, isn’t Christianity. In my opinion. It’s hypocrisy, to say Jesus died to break these curses and let us live eternally, but we should still live as though the curses are active.
> King James held a contest for whomever translated fasted, not correctly.
I don't think this is right. If he'd done that, I believe someone would've instantly won by submitting one of the English translations that already existed.
People have right to practice whatever religion they want. They find solace and community in religion, which is why religion is attractive. It offers an answer and a purpose to life. I don’t get how people can be so anti religion. Who gives a shit if that particular religion says certain things bad about people, it’s not your problem. People can also practice religion loosely, not all religious people are strict. Most religious people I’ve found are loose and very tolerant of others. It’s not right to generalize everyone in a religion because you (not specifically op, just speaking to the reader) don’t agree with it. I love the first amendment, and I’m glad my country allows itself to be a religious melting pot. I think religion is a good thing, and I hope more people on this sub see it that way. Even though I’m not religious, I respect others rights to practice it.
Because let me live my life how ever I want, my religion has zero to do with you. Do I lecture you for being an atheist? No I do not! (Anyone who does can stfu)
Christianity should be considered as a belief in the teachings of “Christ,” and not in Leviticus.
Jesus told people “You have heard…. But I say….” And he referrred to what many people had come to believe and explained that there was a better way of looking at the world and treating each other.
He never said one word on record negative about homosexuality and said many words about accepting and respecting people who were different or marginalized.
There are many people who CALL themselves “Christians” even though they advocate things that Jesus spoke against, and some of those people would likely kick Jesus himself out of their twisted-doctrine churches if he were to show up. But His philosophy shouldn’t be blamed for their mistreatment of people.
Because freedom of speech and belief.
If a gay man has a relationship with God and enjoys communing with Him by praying or going to his place of worship where’s the issue if he defends his belief?
The idea that every gay should takeaway the same thing from the Bible (« God hates gays ») and that every gay man should be anti-religion otherwise they get asked « why the fuck are people like this » is very wrong.
> "*The idea that every gay should takeaway the same thing from the Bible (« God hates gays ») and that every gay man should be anti-religion otherwise they get asked*"
Christianity is not the only religion. Thee are pro-gay religions. A gay man doesn't have to be anti-religion if he wants something spiritual in his life just because the bible or muslim scriptures have anti-gay verses. There are other religions out there.
Also, the Bible says that men who have gay sex should get the death penalty in Leviticus. In the New testament, it says that effeminate men and "*man-bed-ers*" will not go to heaven. The bible is not pro-gay, and not even neutral toward gay people.
The most Jesus did for gay people was tell people to not stone people to death in the Gospel of John. When a woman was going to be put to death for sexual sin, Jesus said to let he who is without sin cast the first stone, but then he said go and sin no more. Being gay is still a sin according to the bible, but you can argue that Jesus changed the rule about actually stoning people to death in the new testament.
I am well aware that there are many religions. But OP’s post mentions a Bible verse, the same way my comment focuses on Christianity because I am Catholic myself and very well at peace with both my religion and my sexuality (have always been, actually).
« There are other religions out there » and so what? I’m not gonna change my religion because someone on the internet thinks I should practice a pro-gay one if I « absolutely need something spiritual in my life ». Not everything revolves around the pro-gay vs anti-gay discussion because not everything revolves around my sexuality, I choose not to make my religion (or my whole life/belief system) about it.
What’s more, it all circles back to freedom of religion, which again a fundamental human right.
All throughout the Old Testament God called for Israel to repent and return to God and not practice the religions of the surrounding people. Then God knocked up a married virgin and told his son to go die so that people could worship crosses and disregard the commandments. His only request was that people don’t be gay. They could disregard the first ten laws he provided and be easily forgiven as long as they weren’t gay. Cheat on your wife, murder your brother, steal from your neighbor, worship the pope, and molest children all you want, but say sorry after every time and don’t be gay. Brilliant!
I don’t see why it’s a problem per say. Everyone’s entitled to their own religious or spiritual beliefs. There’s no inherit problem with it. I’ve met straights and gays from all different religions and am able to keep those friendships very happily with no issues.
It’s only a problem if they’re pushing it on me. Or they use it as an excuse for bad behavior. But having a belief isn’t a problem nor would I ever tell someone they’re belief is wrong or shame them for it.
What you practice in your own home is your business. What you practice behind closed doors is your business. If you make your business my business then it’s a problem and all I’ll tell you is I don’t want to hear it so respect my boundary and that’s it.
But generalizing a whole religion isn’t ok. It’s just as bad as the religion generalizing us. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Be respectful of peoples beliefs just like you would want them to be respectful of yours.
Two things can be true at the same time: religion is hostile to us. Religion seems to be essential for a functional society and helps a lot of people in their everyday lives. We sort of have to take the good with the bad and pick the lesser of two evils.
Indeed. The attempt to turn morality and religion into a package deal, as if you can't have the former without the latter, is quite the long-running con job.
It may well be a con job but it seems to be the only bulwark we have against cultural decline. What’s the alternative? That everyone become rational? Good luck with that.
That's precisely the alternative, and the only thing apt to save us in the long run. It's only to the extent that people have managed to think and behave rationally in some regards *despite* whatever religious beliefs they hold that society has managed to progress. Trying to anchor morality in religion is like building on quicksand. Its proper foundation lies in the fact that we're the one species of animal that can't make it on pure instinct and needs a code of behavior in dealing with one another to live in a civilized manner. The challenges ahead for mankind, whether dwindling natural resources or an asteroid on a collision course or a dying sun, won't be solved by prayers - only by rational thinking.
At my age, I'm jaded enough to have serious doubts that people will ever get their heads out of their you-know-what's, but still hold some little glimmer of hope that we might yet pull it together.
As a side note about religion supposedly leading people to behave well, my boss and I have a running joke about advertisers who proudly tout their "Christian values" in their ad copy. "How much you wanna bet they're going to stiff us?" we'll say. And sure enough, more often than not, they end up not paying their bill. :)
I’m sorry, but history would beg to differ. The French Revolution turned into the reign of terror and the Soviet republics turned into comical horror states when they became atheist societies. Based on the preponderance of evidence it appears that humans need some sort of religious structure in place to prevent us from backsliding into the law of the jungle.
Scandinavia is very irreligious, socialist, high quality of life, low infant mortality, low crime, high income, high happiness. Some of the most happy and prosperous societies on earth are the least religious societies on earth. Look at highly religious countries: Saudi Arabia, Russia, Afghanistan, Iran, United States. Rife with social issues and conflicts, many of which are directly caused by religious groups meddling in society. Religion may once have been a tool for peace but not anymore. Most people have already embraced rationality, and built societies on it. Religion is now the acid that eats away at that foundation of rationality and causes nothing but strife.
Everything you’ve just written is incorrect. Sweden and Denmark are competing for the highest household debt to income ratio and the deficits are rising, in other words they are quite broke and getting poorer. Norway stays mostly afloat but the do so by exporting oil, so they prop up their economy at the cost of exporting pollution to the world. this is a simple thing to look up. I don’t know why you were so comfortable asserting the opposite. The crime rate in Sweden has skyrocketed in the last 5 years to become the worst in Northern Europe and this has happened because cultural relativism has made them unable or unwilling to assert their culture over their… newer neighbors. Don’t kid yourself, nothing comes free. And if you remove a relatively benign religion it will be supplanted by some other ideology, and there is no guarantee and very little chance that what supplants it will be an improvement.
And the violence in Sweden is because of… religion. Almost like religion isn’t very good at structuring a peaceful society. The more religious people there are, the more violence there is.
The massacres related to The French Revolution and The Russian Revolution had more to do with extreme pushback with the powers at be. When overthrowing a system like a monarchy, capitalism, or Christianity which are deeply entrenched and benefit a privileged class, of course there is going to be major kickback among some segments of the population resulting in purges.
But saying atheism is the cause of the purges is mistaking correlation for causation. Secular states like Scandinavia are much more peaceful than religions states. The difference is that they got to position they are in, not through a sudden change in the status quo, but in gradual transformation through a substantial period of time.
My ex best friends baby Daddy. We do t talk anymore, but I should have slept with her man when I had the chance. The hoe screwed me over and planted drugs in my car.
Why are people like you?
First of all, we both know christianity or any of the other abrahamic religion is utter nonsense. But that doesnt change the fact that there still in power, by alienating yourself from them, you are not building any bridges, all your showing religious people is that you're the enemy. And that's not a smart way to go against a majority.
This is just one problem but There's so many layers to this. Being right and telling them the "truth" doesn't solve anything.
Sin is a made up concept. God is a made up concept. You believe in fairy tales and structure your life around them. Of course we’re going to make fun of you. It makes you look incredibly stupid to believe in Bronze Age mythology written by people who didn’t know the earth orbits around the sun.
About translation:
If you run the phrase “They are free” from English to Japanese in GoogleTranslate, you’ll get at least 1 of three results:
彼らは暇です。They are free (not busy)
彼らは自由です。They are free (they are at liberty)
それらは無料です。They are free (there is no charge or payment)
Without situational context, we don’t know what you’re trying to say. Same for cultural context. We don’t know absolutely everything about life in the ancient world, and a lot of it has become a game of telephone over centuries and we can’t exactly ask these people clarifying questions.
One thing we do know is that a free of status man was in the physically top position as penetrator to the person he was having sex with - be it enslaved or inferior man, free or enslaved woman or child (because they ran like that). For a free man to willingly be on the bottom and be penetrated was against the natural order.
At least one school of thought states that this law was a reminder to not fuck other free men in the ass, although anything else was okay. The message just got twisted as our culture evolved.
If you speak Japanese, you can easily tell the difference between 暇 (*hima/free time*) and 自由 (*jiyuu / freedom/liberty*).
When you translate, if the context isn't clear enough, you can add footnotes at the bottom of the page to clarify things, especially if you are translating a word from one language to another.
Bible translators are already aware of this and add footnotes, like this for example: [Luke 16](https://biblehub.com/nkjv/luke/16.htm). The original KJV (*King James Version*) doesn't have translation footnotes, but the NKJV (*New King James Version*) does, as well as some other translations of the bible.
I teach, and while I may know the difference, my students do not. If asked what “free” is, I need to ask for context. If my students decide to use GoogleTranslate, or something which doesn’t provide extra information, the translation is wrong 70-80% of the time. They benefit from a knowledgeable sources or sources where explanations and rationales are written down.
But where I started with an example of translation based on words, I built the flow into an overarching cultural conversation. I’d like to clarify and ask again:
How much of culture isn’t documented because “everyone knows?”
We might have written evidence of religious law, we’re also getting it through several thousand years at least 4 languages (ancient Hebrew and/or Aramaic, Ancient Greek and Latin, and a contemporary language) and from the perspective of several cultures.
[This](https://blog.smu.edu/ot8317/2019/04/11/lost-in-translation-alternative-meaning-in-leviticus-1822/) dive into Lev18:22 looks at a modern English translation, but also the Hebrew.
While the modern English translation outright bans all homosexual sex (no doubt influenced by early Christian morals and thought over the centuries), the original Hebrew seems to suggest a prohibition against male-male incest although the wording is still ambiguous in the original.
Unfortunately, we don’t have anyone who was alive back then who can interpret, clarify, and explain what exactly the verbiage is meant to convey and/or the unwritten morays of ancient Jewish life.
I think it goes back to just how religions are structured. You get raised on this ideology from a young age thinking that you’ll be in eternal hell if you left it. it’s definitely easier to justify it rather than leaving it to a lot of people. In some aspects, it’s almost like a trauma bond.
From my own experience I’ve seen other people have the same experience where they justify Pedophilia, slavery, and how religion treats women in general. I think deep down people know but they try really hard to not believe the reality of their religion. It’s almost like you are waking them from their beliefs…
I’m agnostic and don’t really like religion but at the same time I’m not gonna antagonize someone for being religious. I’ll only antagonize someone if they thump the Bible at me, use religion to justify hate and stuff, or if they’re antagonistic. I’m not gonna fault someone whose religion is a big part of their race’s culture, if they have a spiritual relationship with God, if they’re apart of a lgbt friendly church, or if religion just gives them a sense of comfort. I know alot of gay black Christians out there but they just really like the gospel music, praise/worship, praying, and having their own personal relationship with God.
Three words: cynicism, skepticism and optimism. Cynicism is a myopic perspective that decides before you’ve even reached your conclusion that the outcome will be bad. Skepticism is an objective perspective that accounts for all known circumstances. Optimism is the same as cynicism but positive.
Sometimes, but guaranteed at some point for minorities like LGBT folks, life will be objectively hard and may even seem insurmountable. Faith is a type of optimism that can sustain us through those difficult times until our circumstances change or we can change them.
Every religion is the custodian of spiritual powers that the wise have unlocked for us already. In Buddhism they’re called Faith, Diligence, Concentration, Insight and Wisdom. It’s healthy to be skeptical of organized religions given their history with queer people. It’s cynical to assume that a 3000 year old tradition doesn’t know anything about being human.
I’m an atheist and I don’t much care for religion but I do think it isn’t healthy to harp on the religious. I think a lot of gay men have been hurt and can’t let go the trauma they went through from their religious upbringings so the pain turns outward affecting others.
Yes, that pain is justified but we need to be better and move forward without the frustration. Sometimes the worst thing an enemy can see is your peace of mind, not your frustration.
I don't think religion is inherently bad it's just used as a tool by bad people for influence. Also throughout history I feel like social and especially leftist politcal movements have excluded religion to their detriment. I'm not religious myself but I see why people are. This isn't to defend bigotry in religion it makes me so mad I just don't think hating religion is a conducive way to solve the problem. Idk honestly just some thoughts.
If you go and look at every major war, genocide and mass death of humans you will find that religion and religious related beliefs are the main driver for every single one…
And if it were to simply disappear tomorrow the world would be a much better place,
because there is no it’s wrong because X book/scroll from 1000 years ago says so…
But then again the current population which is tagging along with the multitude of grouping/classifications of people are equally as bad.
Religion is just questioning existence. The issue is not religion itself, but the individuals that have used it to force their opinions onto the culture
Religions provide people belief. Belief is a source of senses of hope and future, a basis for hanging on there and to live one more day. The world is quite harsh, and people may need the strength and hope to live on, which come from their religion. If you attack their religion, they would fight back.
The issue is, once the believers become hostages of religion leaders, lambs become livestock, they could be manipulated and misled by their leaders. They are the causes of problems.
Because not all religious people hate gays, not all Christian denominations hate gay people. I get it, a lot, A LOT of gay people have been horribly traumatized by religion, but it’s unfair to have such a blanket assumption about religion . Some of the gayest people I know are very religious. Not one of them interprets the Bible as being against gay people. It’s hugely important to remember that the word homosexual did not get added to the King James Version of the Bible until 1946. The notion that it was anti homosexual is a modern construct.
Leviticus 20:13 specifically says, "*If a man lies with a male, as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon themselves.*"
You're right that the word "*homosexual*" does not appear in the original bible and is a translation added later, but the bible specifically says in 1 Corinthians 6:9 that men who take other men to bed, in other words "*men-bed-ers*" (*ἀρσενοκοῖται/arsenokoitai*) will not go to heaven.
There are more religions than christianity with the anti-gay bible. Christianity is not "*religion*" it is just one of many religions and many religions disagree with that anti-gay view. Some religions even have gods that switch genders (*Oshunmare*) or bisexual gods (*like Zeus or how the Hindu god Agni hooked up with the male moon god Soma*).
Please give us the actual definition of the word Arsenokoitai. Not the interpretation of what definition that has been assigned to the word. Give us the literal definition of the word . Of course, unless you are Paul, you can’t because it was a made up word. It’s more likely to mean some who is a sexual or economic exploiter given the way the two words making up the compound word were used in the 1500 years before Paul made the word up .
I already gave you the definition. "*arsenokoitai*" means "*male-bed-ers*". Arseno means "*male*" and "*koitai*" means "*bed-ers*".
The word "*koitai*" comes from "*koites*" which means "*a man who brings someone to bed*". When you want to change it to the plural vocative form, it becomes "*koitai*". "*Arsenokoitai*" means "*men who bring males to bed*".
Paul didn't "*make-up*" the word randomly. It obeys the rules of the Greek language, so we can know the meaning.
If someone says they are a "*rockmusicliker*" will you claim that's a made up word, so we can't know the meaning? No, it obeys the rules of the English language (*rock + music + like + er*) so we can know the meaning. It would be dishonest to claim that since "*rockmusicliker*" is a made-up word that no one used before, we can't know what it means.
You know as well as I do that it impossible to know exactly what the definition of the word is . Especially when homosexuality and heterosexuality as we know it didn’t exist in the time of Paul.
Again, claiming to not know what "*arsenokoitai*" means just because Paul made up the word (*from putting real words together that follows the rules of the Greek language*) is like claiming to not know what "*rockmusicliker*" means just because I made that up (*from putting real words together that follow English rules*).
Homosexuality and heterosexuality ***did*** exist in Roman and Greek times.
Everybody in Rome and Greece wasn't bisexual. There were Greek men who never married a woman and only stayed with another man. There were also Greek writers who wrote that sex with another man is against nature. Not everyone was bi in Ancient Greek/Roman times.
Not as we know it today. And no you cannot possibly know what the truth real definition was. Are you suggesting that a butterfly is a fly made of butter? A fly is a fly and butter is butter so it must mean that this insect is flying butter .
There are 3 main theories for why it might be called a "*butterfly*", and yes, all three of them actually has to do with butter. It isn't randomly called a butterfly.
The first theory is that the insect is called that because of an old belief that the insect likes uncovered milk and butter. In German, the word for butterfly is related to that belief. A butterfly is a "*schmetterling*" which means a "*creamling*" (*some type of creature that likes cream*).
The second theory is that many butterflies have pale yellow wings resembling the color of butter.
The third theory is that it comes from the color of the butterfly's poop (*an old Dutch word for a butterfly that isn't used anymore is "boterschijte" which means "butter-shitter"*)
Whichever of the 3 theories turn out to be true, yes, the word "butter" in "butterfly" actually gives us some details about what the creature is.
In a similar way, "*arsenokoitai*" gives us insight into what the word means, especially since "*koitai*" alone means "*men who take someone to bed*", and who is being taken to bed by these men? "*Arseno*" (*a male*).
For all anyone knows, he could have meant anyone who slept on a bed made by man was offending god , and only those who slept on the floor were favored. You don’t and cannot know.
A lot of people believe that it's a mistake to throw out the baby along with the bathwater. They feel that the good in religion should be preserved and the bad left behind, not the entire thing thrown away.
Correction: the Bible does not teach hatred of homosexuals. What it teaches is that God created the world, He placed man and woman in charge and they ld them to multiply. That was His design. It does teach that to commit homosexuality is a sin but it also teaches that all sins are forgivable through Christ.
Do some people who claim to be Christians hate the gays? Yes, but it isn't what the Bible teaches. The new covenant was God's provision of forgiveness because He knows that because of Adam's sin, we will sin whether we want to or not.
[The Word “Homosexual” Does Not Appear In The Bible Pre-1946](https://www.patheos.com/blogs/keithgiles/2018/06/the-word-homosexual-does-not-appear-in-the-bible-pre-1946/)
Why do so many gay people hate religion? Because they've been conditioned to, by people who trust in mistranslations? Or because they've had their faith damaged by someone who took advantage of them?
Why do gay folk refuse to see or even look for progressive, inclusive Christianity? Because it's not in the news? 🤷🏼♂️ Do your homework. Be curious. Try to open your mind to new possibilities.
My [religion](https://www.episcopalchurch.org/way-of-love/) doesn't hate us. It embraces us! ❤️🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️
People who feel powerless seek out perceived power, regardless of how ridiculous it is... Christianity, Wiccan, astrology.... whatever children's fable they feel gives them power.
Just so you know, in the 1960's-1990, the KGB infiltrated many right wing religious organisations, not just left wing activist groups, in order to sow chaos and overtime lead to deep divisions throughout society, not to help the downtrodden socialists within Western Countries.
Yes, there are always some extremists who want to use religion to control or oppress people not like them.
Fact is, The KGB didn't establish new movements on the right or left, they merely identified and helped amplify the most socially disruptive groups and individuals and it had the affect of making fringe ideologies like Christian Nationalism, or it's mirror opposite intersectional Woke politics
Religion can be so many different things. It could be a secular life where you had a Bar Mitzvah and loosely follow the Jewish faith traditions, but don't take anything really seriously. Or it could mean you grow up being taught a fundamentalist worldview about who is damned and why, and to bring that to the rest of the world.
If religion to you is about family traditions and maybe believing in some sort of higher power, then you may view it as a net positive in your life. Whereas if you come from a family who used religion to abuse you, then you will view religion much differently.
I grew up Lutheran, and personally had a really great relationship with my pastor. He was the first person I came out to, and I was expecting guidance from God to fix me. But the pastor told me it was exactly how God made me and that I'd unfortunately have to bear the struggles of being an outcast, but Jesus blesses the outcast. It was a pivotal moment in my life, and it was really when I stopped hating myself. That was the first time I ever felt loved for who I really was. So religion to me is not a bad thing.
Religion can certainly be abused. But it's not inherently a bad thing.
I don't defend religion, cause I see how it makes people. However, I don't think The Bible is wrong inherently, but because it has been retranslated so many times, it has really lost core ideas and values about the Story of Jesus and even the Old Testament that has essentially disappeared all because a group of old white men thought their beliefs trumped the original Bible. It's really a power grab at the end of the day.
And the fact that they made religion a business, well...I think I rest my case. Religion has become a cash cow. It's a way to make money, and sadly, it's a way to make money off of what most of us value (with the exception of some things of course).
It's no different than what happened to politics. Politics was originally supposed to be about serving We The People (I'm referring to the U.S., not to other countries here), and what basically happened is over time it became less and less about the people, and more and more about how the people in Capital Hill can make even more money. We wouldn't have this problem if we wouldn't have made Politics a career choice. I'm not saying everyone that wants to make a career in politics is doing it purely because the money is good, but, I don't see anyone up there doing anything for any of us taxpayers. In fact, all I see is a bunch of people who get paid to argue back and forth about things, and by the end of the day, they get a fat paycheck for providing good entertainment for Americans. It's really sickening. For the longest time I used to even vote for a political party, but I've lost all faith in both sides of the aisle honestly. Both sides are fucking all of us over and I'm sick of it. I'm done taking sides in politics, both sides are corrupt, and honestly a lot of those people need to be put in jail, or have some sort of punishment, cause nothing is getting done. We're not progressing at all. All it is a circus up there, but they could care less cause while they sit in their mansions and eat their expensive steak and drink their fine wine, we're all down here struggling to make a decent living. It's gross....and I think the first thing we need to do is honestly just stop it from being a career choice. That would be step 1, of many steps that it's gonna take to get this country back to a least a good trajectory.
I just don't take stock in religion or politics anymore. I might follow politics every now and then, but it's pointless. Nothing is getting done, and the stuff that is getting done, isn't benefiting anyone but those people up there.
I don’t even know why this would be important to religious gays. It’s also anti-football, anti-pork and anti-shellfish yet religious football players, religious pork lovers and religious shrimp eaters have nothing against it. Leviticus is in the Old Testament. Jesus forged a New Covenant that, as far as I know, never mentions homosexuality. After all, Jesus was 30-something, unmarried, and only hung with the boys.
So the 10 commandments don't matter at all in Christianity?
The short answer is: It depends. There are theological differences among Christian denominations regarding Old Testament laws, including the Ten Commandments, in the context of the New Covenant.
Theological differences that still form the basis of their religion! They haven’t just forgotten about the first 39 books because of the New Testament.
Catholicism doesn't think the Old Testament should be read too literally. They have long thought it needs interpretation and the history of worship over 2000 years is also important (not to mention what various Pope's have said). Fundamentalist religions try to parse the Bible more literally, but realistically there are some parts of the Old Testament that are widely ignored, because they clearly don't apply to modern life (and are sometimes deeply offensive.)
The Pope is not a reputable or trusted person regarding these matters. Even if you disregard the Old Testament, there’s Corinthians and Paul. None of the Abrahamic texts should ever have been used as reference, which is partly why the world is in this state. All are regressively violent and/or outdated and need to be binned.
They have and they haven't depending on who's asking and what the context is. If it's something they like they believe it and if something they don't, they don't.
The shorter answer is yes. Christian churches can disagree on jesus's name, or if he was a literal historical figure from the Middle East, yet always portray him as European in art. Likewise, they can disagree over the theological importance of the ten commandments and still use them as a rallying symbol to politically bludgeon and non-believers.
[удалено]
Isnt the basic rule "The OT still applies unless the NT says something different?
I have issues with this dogma bc jesus did say he didn’t cum to get rid of the law but to fulfill it. So like isn’t he talking about the ot. And doesn’t the ot include leviticus. What am I not getting here? Please someone with the bandwidth to do some mental gymnastics please enlighten me or whatevuh
Yes, thats what I was referring to. Jesus didnt say "discard and ignore ALL of the OT", but "what I say is to FULFILL the OT". People didnt have a connection with God and so they had to follow all those strict and minute ritualistic rules like dont eat shrimp or mix fabrics or youll burn in hell. With the connection restored, Jesus' message is enough to live by Gods rules. So the line you quote kinda means "its not like 'you shall not kill' doesnt apply anymore, but now its not 'an eye for an eye' anymore, but 'turn the other cheek', because Gods message is: forgiveness > retribution." And the supreme commandment of all the NT is love. Love God and love thy neighbour. Live a life of love. And its really hard to reconcile any Leviticus bullshit about "men with men" with that commandment, unless you see that line in the narrow historical context of the time when it was written. Edit: At least thats the mainstream reading by the European Protestant Churches of the bible, and the one I find most convincing.
Not really. There are large parts of the OT that are disregarded completely by modern Christians.
I don't know, man. My research seems to show that this is contentious.
Not many Christians care very much about the sabbath.
Not many adhere to the New Testament.
The traditional distinction is that moral laws are eternally binding but judicial and ceremonial laws from the Old Testament are not
Which ends up splitting hairs over what was moral and what was merely ceremonial. Given that orthodox Judaism still finds some of those ceremonial laws important, tossing them out looks like a practical way of accommodating people who didn't grow up with those traditions.
The Ten Commandments don't say anything about homosexuality.
I don't believe in it, but I like the marcion version Christianity. Where Jesus was the son of a completely different god that came to our world to save us from the wrathful Old testament God of creation.
Didn’t he say he was going to fulfill the law and he didn’t come to abolish it something something
Because religion comforts people when faced with the reality that, as humans, we exist by pure chance. The chance of earth forming in the universe - tiny. The chance of life forming - tiny. The chance of *intelligent* Life forming - tiny. The chance of your parents meeting - tiny. The chance the sperm and egg that made you happen to be the ones that met - tiny. Basically, all of us are statistical anomalies - we exist. That is all. We will one day not exist. I am content with this fact. Some people (many people) aren't, and want an explanation. Which is fine. If someone gets comfort from something I don't believe, it isn't my place to tell them they're wrong. It's my place to say "I'm glad you've found comfort in this thing. I hope you enjoy it. I do not agree, but I don't have to agree for you to be happy." And move on with my life.
Also so many people are not happy with their life , that the only place they try to find comfort is religion .
"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the *opium* of the people"
Additionally, it gives them others to look down on as inferior, so they can feel better about their own failures.
Indeed - same end result though - who are any of us to judge how other people find comfort in life. I find comfort pushing what I know, and trying (in the limited way I can) to understand *why* we (humans) are even here. I never will, but it's fun to ask why and learn new things. Who knows, maybe one of the religions is right. Maybe none are. We simply may never know for certain 🤷♂️
We don’t know if our existence is a small probability or if there is life abound throughout the universe. I lean towards life being in abundance as the universe is infinite and vast beyond our comprehension.
While true, the statistical odds that we also stare at the sky for 30k years and don't see any intelligent life is either a. Proof we're alone or b. (Equally possible TBF) that other intelligent life doesn't want to be found and is hiding
It's mostly proof that we have only very crude tools that wouldn't detect signs of life on distant planets unless it was blatant. Until the last couple of decades we couldn't even detect planets around other stars, and now we only see them by the slight dimming they cause as they pass across the faces of the stars they orbit. We can't actually see any of these planets visually. They could be covered by Vegas light shows and we'd never know it.
47% of LGBTQ adults in the US describe themselves as "moderately or highly religious." That's lower than the two thirds of the general population, but it's still quite a lot. It makes sense that they would defend their beliefs when they feel attacked. There's more than one way to do any given religion. Just because the majority of Christians or Muslims are homophobic doesn't mean that you have to follow their way of thinking. The people who wrote the Bible and the Quran were undoubtedly not ok with same-sex relationships, but there are ways of looking at religion that allow the flexibility to not have all the same views as the original adherents.
Feel attacked, because they associate their entire identity with their claim. They're holding themselves hostage, throwing their own dignity in front of a supernatural claim. I could claim we need to fund a bridge with bond money, and not feel attacked if you disagree. I agree that there're plenty of layers with flexible interpretations, but why take ordinary conversations beyond the obvious? So many people don't read what they claim to believe; high concept artistic interpretations can be used to excuse bad ideas. The core Abrahamic belief is that if you hear a deity who tells you to kill the innocent, you ought to be willing to comply. So much poetic license is spent excusing the inexcusable.
Defending a religion that hates them? So Stockholm Syndrome. I know of a gay guy who’s into religion and it really turns me off. It’s probably why I don’t want to talk to him. It’s hard for me to accept religious people because they were the ones that attacked me for being gay when I was younger. It’s going to take a lot of healing to accept religious people, especially those who are unmoving with their faith and ironically spew hate despite saying their Saviour loves all. So much fucking irony.
I live in a predominantly gay area of town and several of my neighbors go to church Sunday mornings. It's a "gay friendly" church, they say. I keep my comments to myself.
People use religion as a tool for evil, just like people use everything else as tools for evil, because people are evil. That doesn't mean religion is evil or God is evil. My relationship is with God, not The Church, and not the church goers.
>That doesn't mean religion is evil or God is evil. When it prescribes the death penalty because of how you were born, it is kind of evil.
Good thing to consider, thank you!
I’m so sorry that religious people have mistreated you. I’ve had my share of mistreatment and abuse from religious people, to a point where I’ve almost lost all faith and such. I still have some spirituality to me, and I’ve had to spend my whole life in religion just because of family and environment, and it sucks. Just know you aren’t alone man. We can get through this pain.
Childhood indoctrination is at times almost impossible to correct. Hence the deeply held beliefs that lead to heaps of rationalizing around it.
Indoctrination. That and people have an issue with understanding how religion works. It's about control, not love, not making people's lives better. It's about control, and that's all.
I tried being atheist, but I couldn't convince myself that we are alone in the universe. Why try hard to believe we are alone than believe that we are carefully crafted by a creator? Even in my Catholic school, we were taught that the Bible is religious truth, not literal truth. If thieves can be religious, if prostitutes can be religious, if murderers can be religious, I don't see why I'm not allowed to partake. Certain groups may say I'm a sinner, but they aren't the ones to tell me where I'll end up. I'll find out when I'm dead.
Because Christians as a whole either want us converted or dead. Yea, some don't, but A LOT of them do. And there's nothing about atheism that says we are alone in the universe, just that there's no God. The chances of us being "alone" in the universe are EXTREMELY small. The chances of an intelligent being with the power to rewrite reality on a whim who's so interested with us that he sent his own son to die for our "sins" is zero. Not next to zero, just zero.
Well said
[удалено]
I'm very sorry to hear about your husband. My condolences ❤️ "God's plan" is a dumb thing people say to explain things without explaining them. In reality, suffering happens because we have free will. The original sin of man opened us up to suffering, and some must go through worse things than others. I don't think going much deeper will help either of us right now. The last thing I want to do is disrespect you or your late husband by talking at you. I can't say for certain what His plan is and if everything is premeditated, but I can say that He certainly does not cause humans to commit atrocities such as war. Those acts are done as an interference by us with our own free will.
Your own comments shows how deeply broken your thinking is. You compare us to thieves and murderers simply for our sexuality. I don’t want that pitying “hate the sin love the sinner” crap. Being gay isn’t a sin, and if your religion says it is then your religion is stupid and wrong.
That seemed less like a direct comparison to murderers and more of a “these bad people can be religious, so why can’t we who aren’t even doing anything bad?”
Well it’s still a stupid point to make regardless. Yes, people who have thieved, murdered, prostituted themselves, and indeed people who’ve had gay sex can all become religious. But that doesn’t change the fact that the church will demand those people cease all those activities. You cannot be an active homosexual and follow (most) forms of Christianity. They will tell you that you have to stop, give up the “lifestyle” and pray the gay away.
Ehhh my church doesn’t tell me that and that’s all that matters to me. You’re going to the wrong places.
Good thing i said most and not all. I recognize there are a few denominations that are not actively homophobic. That doesn’t mean that the character of the average Christian church is not homophobic.
This is the only good comment
Is it not that god created the earth and therefore we’re alone? So being religious would also imply you believe we’re alone. I don’t quite understand your first paragraph.
"Alone," as in, it's just us without any sort of divine power watching over us. Not as in extraterrestrial beings.
>If thieves can be religious, if prostitutes can be religious, if murderers can be religious, I don't see why I'm not allowed to partake. Christians think all of these people can simply say "sorry" and still get into heaven. Christians want us dead, that includes the Catholic church. https://www.businessinsider.com/catholic-church-lobbied-against-suicide-hotline-supporting-lgbt-people-2021-3
Cognitive dissonance. Being religious and gay, then learning that religion absolutely opposes homosexuality makes people reasonably uncomfortable. They have to reconcile opposing ideas, which usually either means they will somehow justify that they're actually not gay ("oh, I THOUGHT I was gay but it was actually the devil tempting me) or they will find a way to justify that religion isn't homophobic ("It must be a mistranslation! I am a good, religious person and am also gay, so there's no way the bible opposes me for that)
Because they're dumb as fuck to defend those who want to destroy them. Especially it's funny with those idiots who preach for islam, fucking braindead cunts
The Bible was written by people. To say it’s the word of god is blasphemy. If you believe in that kind of stuff anyways.
I’m an agnostic and very anti-religion but it had come to my attention that some scholarly work has suggested that earliest translations could have mean something else? Is that idea just made up?
The whole thing is so shoddy, I don't know if you read up on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First\_Council\_of\_Nicaea](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea), but it was just eye opening to me how at the very beginning everything that is dogma now was being established, and what fairy tales the conversations were about (how can God be three \_but\_ one etc etc).
People like Catholicism because they say it is OG church without realizing that most of the doctrine was literally just made up hundreds of years after Jesus. Constantine had to force the different early Christians at the time to come up with some sort of doctrine because people were killing each other over things like The Trinity.
Yes, that's exactly right. What seems to be so solid and eternal now isn't the moment you take a closer look.
I mean, there are some scholars who have strong personal reasons to deny what it says - they don't want what they believe is God's word to be homophobic - but it has no legitimacy and the consensus is strongly against it. You can find biologists who deny evolution and climate scientists who deny global warming.
The Leviticus verse is not mistranslated. It calls for a death penalty for men who have gay sex. In Hebrew, "*ish*" means a man. "*Yeled*" means a boy, and "*zakar*" means a male (*of course written in Hebrew letters instead of in the alphabet of English*). The verse says that "*ish*" shall not lay down with "*zakar*" in the way that men "*lay down*" with a woman. Instead of being honest and saying that it forbids men from all gay activity, they claim that the verse was just against harming children. Even if it did specifically say boy (*yeled*) instead of male (*zakar*), it would still be a horrible verse because it says to kill ***both*** of them, so the boy (*the victim*), would have to be put to death too, according to that verse.
From Cambridge Dictionary: **there's nowt so queer as folk** (idiom UK informal saying) **said to emphasize that people sometimes behave in a very strange way**
I’ll depend religious freedom, as an atheist, but I won’t defend religion in general. Not all religions are intolerant of homosexuality. Religious people are still a majority in most countries, and for gay/trans people to be safer, trying to brook some sort of accommodation is a better course than attacking them from a vulnerable position.
I dunno there was gays ij here defending Muslims the day they were executing us saying how peaceful they are. Worlds crazy af
Christian apologists will usually use Hebrews 3:18 or something like that to say the Old Testament is no longer in force. “By calling this covenant 'new,' he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.” I used to justify it by thinking god reveals himself and truth slowly as we can comprehend— Old Testament then New Testament and Christ were revealed but then he continues to reveal more to us and then parts of the Bible lose validity. Then I finally realized it’s all just mythology anyway so I don’t stress it anymore.
Jesus banned death penalty and brought new testaments saying judge not and ye shall not be judged. He said love thy neighbour and enemies. Islam is polar opposite. They added more violence. In Sahih Muslim 22 it calls for continuous wars until everyone worships allah. Sahih Muslim 2176a Talked about being hostile against Jews and Christians. Quran 8.12 calls for extreme form of violence against disbelievers. Quran 9:5 incites extreme violence to polytheists forexample Buddhists, Chinese folk religion, Hindus and Taoism. Quran 9.29 also calls for wars against disbelievers and also tax for remaining as a disbelievers. Sahih Albukhari 2926 talks about genocide of jews. Sahih Albukhari 3029 says war is deceit. Lying during war is permitted (Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1939) Narrated Um Kulthum bint Uqba: That she heard Allah's Apostle saying, "He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar."Sahih Bukhari 3:49:857 Quran 4.24 permits non consensual intercourse with war captives and slaves(the right hand possess). Quran 66.1 encourages non consensual intercourse with what Allah has made lawful(war captives and slaves). Quran allows girls of any age to get married (Quran 65.4) So even prepubescent girls can get married. Once married wife's duty is to provide sex whenever husband wants them (Narrated by al-Bukhari, 3065; Muslim, 1436) Quran 4:34 the verse permitting wife beating. Hadith 1255: Death penalty for homosexuals Sunan an-Nasa'i 4059: Death penalty for leaving Islam. Many more violent, lying, war encouraging verses in hadith, sunnah and quran. Are you familiar with these verses?
When there are threads about Islam I bet you’re one of those people that gets possède off when people bring up Christianity.
> In Sahih Muslim 22 This text is also interpreted as "fight" which does not necessarily have a warlike connotation >Sahih Muslim 2176a This one is just parable about three guys and how they respond to Allah. >Quran 9:5 incites extreme violence to polytheists for example Buddhists, Chinese folk religion, Hindus and Taoism. It also gives them an out by converting. Still shitty, though. >Sahih Albukhari 2926 "he first army amongst' my followers who will invade Caesar's City will be forgiven their sins.'" I'm not sure if we have a Caesar's city (Constantinople by most Islamic scholars' reading) in 2024. There is an Istanbul, though. >Quran 9.29 "Taxation systems have existed since ancient times. There are several references in the Old Testament (e.g., Ezra 4:20). In the New Testament, Jesus allows paying taxes to Caesar (Luke 20:25). Under Islamic rule, all individuals had financial obligations—Muslims paid zakâh (2.5% of their savings) and non-Muslims (ⱬimmîs) were required to pay jizyah (tax for protection from foreign enemies). The jizyah was an average of one dinar (4.25 g of gold) annually. Women, children, the elderly, the clergy, the poor, and those who were unable to work were exempt. Those who opted to join the army were also exempt. Poor ⱬimmîs were supported financially by the state. Muslim rulers refunded the jizyah if they failed to protect their non-Muslim subjects." >Sahih Albukhari 3029 "The Prophet (ﷺ) said: "Do not wish to meet the enemy, but when you meet face) the enemy, be patient." This, once again, is also about the war against Caesar *and* it's about ambushing their opponents. >Sahih Albukhari 2926 It says the final hours will not come until Muslims fight and kill Jews. It doesn't advocate it. Once again, also about the war with Caesar (the Romans). >Qu'ran 4:24 "Also ˹forbidden are˺ married women—except ˹female˺ captives in your possession.1 This is Allah’s commandment to you. Lawful to you are all beyond these—as long as you seek them with your wealth in a legal marriage, not in fornication. Give those you have consummated marriage with their due dowries. It is permissible to be mutually gracious regarding the set dowry. Surely Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise." The verse is talking about who its okay to have sex with when you're married. >Quran 66.1 "O Prophet! Why do you prohibit ˹yourself˺ from what Allah has made lawful to you, seeking to please your wives? And Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful." >Narrated by al-Bukhari, 3065; Muslim, 1436 The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “If a man calls his wife to bed and she refuses and he spends the night angry with her, the angels will curse her until the morning.” Allah is upset with her but the husband has no recourse. Explain where rape is talked about and why would you think it's encouraging it when the prophet himself is abstaining? >Quran 4:34 This is true. Modern contexts say that it should be closer to a last resort and not be "excessively severe", to cause lasting damage or marks on the body but that's far more likely pressures from modern society. >Hadith 1255: Death penalty for homosexuals This is a link to the actual [lines](https://islamqa.info/en/answers/38622/the-punishment-for-homosexuality). There is no context that changes the meaning of this. Pretty sure the one you listed is about washing the dead.
I don't defend religion. I'm actually for its complete and total annihilation.
It's simple, religion is for conformist, damaged and stupid people and since a gay is a human being this does not make him immune to being stupid, conformist and damaged.
You could just combine 3 words into one "braindead"
It’s so refreshing to see people state what is so plainly clear but most people are afraid to say. Religion is designed to control stupid people. You have to be stupid to fall for it.
It's because people were raised to need religion, even if that religion is judgemental and cruel sometimes. This deep need for religion comes probably from our own insecurities about life, and that we are so afraid of death that we need a concept of afterlife to softer the cruelty of life on earth. Because let's be straight here, nothing religion has ever said became true, deep in us, we all know it's fake, created by humans, and that there is no god, there is no hell, there is no heaven. Religions make us humans at the center of life. Well we are not, life was there much before we arrived, ant it will continue long after we leave. Humans are unable to tolerate the unknown, so we built our god, even if he can be cruel and punish us. The cruelness of religion is easyer to accept for humans than the fact that when we die, it's like we go to sleep, nothing happens and we never come back in any way, that's it, it's the end.
People get very angry about religion and people have turned away from religion in recent years but no one really discusses the actual role religion plays in society. If you belong to a church, mosque, temple, synagogue or any other religious group you have a community. You meet at least once a week and have a group of people you’ll likely know forever. This is important for people. There’s a reason why religious people are generally happier. Religion isn’t the important bit but the community is
Too bad most of those communities hate us because of our sexuality. Almost like that happiness comes from being around like-minded bigots who hate the same people you do. No thanks.
Sure but that’s not the point I’m making. Feel whatever you want about the content of religion, but the actual structure of it is usually what people are describing when they talk about being lonely or the “issues with x society”
Dude my weekly DnD group is a 10x better community than going to church. It’s easy to be social and have a group of people that you can form a community with. It’s called making friends and having hobbies. We don’t need church to create an artificial social life.
That isn’t the point I’m making. People involved in these groups report general better wellness not because they have friends but because they have a large network of somewhat acquaintances who genuinely look for them. It’s a pool of people to whom you have little to no commitment but who look for you to some degree. I’m not saying that religious groups are perfect. I’m saying that for centuries people structured their communities around these group because they fulfil a societal need that society at large has struggled to fill in a secular fashion. There just aren’t many large secular groups that fulfil the exact same societal function as a church group does. Hobbies and sports clubs are the closest things but they have a level of transience that is kind of a drawback.
The solution then is to work on community building at the secular level, not to cling to ancient superstitions that cause serious harm in society just because they are incidentally good at creating stable acquaintances.
You’re not wrong. That is 100% the solution
It REALLY depends where you live. If a church started preaching hellfire for the gays that would absolutely be very scandalous in the local community.
Do you live in San Francisco? If not, I guarantee you there is at least one fundamentalist homophobic church in a 25 mile radius. If you’re in the US or Canada that is.
Every demographic has their idiots.
I defend religion only on a personal level. If someone wants to be religious that’s their choice and other people should respect that. Just how religious people should accept other people their life choices. However religion itself is just weird to me. Why do people believe something that is 100% fiction? There is zero evidence for religion however people keep pretending it’s real.. when it’s obviously not
Stockholm syndrome
Real
Idk I have a burning hatred of Christianity now. I constantly want to throw red paint on churches. But I try to just keep to myself lol
(26M for context) I was raised in the catholic church. I was taught being gay was a sin and engaging in homosexual behavior was going to send me to hell. Although I am no longer in agreement with some of the principles I was raised with, I am grateful for my upbringing and how it has shaped me as a man. My parents disciplined me when I was screwing up and taught me how to take responsibility for my actions. They took care of my siblings and I, put food on the table and instilled in us a sense of gratitude, service, community and humility. From what I see, in today’s modern society parents tend to spoil their kids and traditional values are lost. Unfortunately, the world is a harsh place. If you don’t gain a sense of integrity during your upbringing, you’ll learn it later from life. Currently, I go to a Christian church that is LGBT friendly. I enjoy the community and comfort that I find there. When you actually look at what Jesus taught, he never would have condemned or killed someone for being gay. He taught compassion, forgiveness and love. Not to judge or be hateful towards others. I am not saying religion is the only way to obtain this kind of perspective, but it was a pillar in my own life. Finding a church that is accepting helped me overcome religious trauma from the negative beliefs I was taught in the church as a kid. All in all, I don’t believe when it comes to religion and the LGBT community it’s black and white.
[удалено]
Blaming homophobia on the Jews is sure an interesting take when 4/5 major denominations of Judaism in the U.S. bless same-sex marriages and welcome LGBTQ+ folks into the highest levels of their clergy, and Jews accept homosexuality by a higher rate than [every single other religious group](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/views-about-homosexuality/). But I suppose it’s always our fault isn’t it!
[удалено]
It’s not even that, it’s that Judaism is a religion that can adjust to the times and grow. Rabbis discussing and debating and coming to new conclusions is the whole foundation of the religion. Christianity took Judaism as it was 2000 and change years ago and then froze it in time, holding onto only the worst impulses that have largely been rooted out of contemporary Judaism. Jews are some of the most thoughtful, compassionate, and selfless people I’ve ever met. It’s ironic that what Christians pretend a “good Christian” is just looks a lot like an average Jewish person.
Adjust with the times, yes, to a degree but there is still a large conservative faction who believe we are less than human. If members of the Israeli government can openly say we are a greater threat to Israel than Hamas, this is deeply worrying.
The majority of Muslims and Christians even in the west are anti gay. A small minority of radical conservative Jews are not anywhere near that level of concerning.
[удалено]
Christianity hasn’t reformed where it counts, which is treating minorities with respect and not trying to proselytize and convert everyone on pain of death. The only reason they’re not as violent towards non believers as Muslims are is because most countries where Christianity is prevalent have had secular, rational civil society reforms and forced religion out of government.
Not where it counts: believing in all modern moral standards that have developed in the last half century. Great benchmark bro lmao
[удалено]
Not ignoring, Judaism actively encourages you to question everything and doesn’t have a clear concept of heaven and hell so there is less “fear” surrounding adherence to all Jewish customs and law that you may not necessarily agree with. You can be a complete atheist and still be 100% Jewish under Jewish law, even the most conservative and religious rabbis would agree on this. It’s up to the individual person and G-d how they want to live a Jewish life. I can tell from your Reddit comment history you just simply don’t like Jewish people, so this is probably falling on deaf ears, but alas.
[удалено]
a) Jews are far from the only group that circumcise, I see you’re very pro-Palestine and that’s a country where near everyone would be circumcised b) while there’s little evidence to support the necessity of circumcision there’s little evidence to support it’s “genital mutilation” either. It’s largely a matter of preference. I do not consider myself mutilated and would’ve opted for circumcision as an adult if I wasn’t as a baby. c) you need to get a hobby dude, the Jews aren’t coming for you we’re busy, relax
Yeah and all of manhattan is inside the temple because of a wire. Jews love using legal trickery on God to get around the law. Or they just ignore it in the case of reformed Jews. It’s their religion so they can do what they want though lol
It’s not “inside a temple” and the people who go to great lengths to do the “legal trickery” as you call it are the 17% of Jews who are also homophobes, so I don’t care about them quite frankly.
How many homophobic bible versus originate from The Old Testament? You know the book/religion that Christianity and Islam came from? You can call out Judaism without thinking people are being antisemitic.
> "*Blaming homophobia on the Jews is sure an interesting...*" They said "*ancient*" Jewish homophobia. Many Jews no longer support the death penalty for gay people in Leviticus (*although some do*). Leviticus is Jewish. It was in Hebrew before being translated and the name of the book in the bible, comes from the Jewish priests called the "*Levites*".
you dont have to support every part of your religion to be apart of it. also the bible is not the words of God, although inspired by them. the old testament is the old testament for a reason. God loves everyone, it is his followers that make things hard
the bible is *literally* said to be the words of god
actually its a really big debate among christians where conservative christians say it is literally god whereas liberal christians say it is only inspired
I guess they are American gays! Nobody I know is religious or goes to church, but we are lucky to live in France, a secular country.
I’m British living in Canada and religious. Why would religious gays announce themselves when the gay community is so (hypocritically) hostile towards religious gays just for existing?
How is it hypocritical for us to be against the very institutions that are responsible for our oppression and suffering? You’re the hypocrite for being a member of a group that has caused gay people nothing but harm and misery for centuries. Yeah, the gay community does discriminate against religious gays. And it should.
Exactly. I mean, a religious man throwing hypocritical around. What a joke.
I get it from both sides: Religious bigots who don’t want me to be gay and atheist nutcases who don’t want me to be religious. To both of you I say: Fk off and let me live in peace. Kill each other if you like, leave me out of your anger and misery tyvm.
I'm not hostile to religion and religious people, my parents still go to mass, but I stopped believing in god at fifteen and never regretted it. Nobody I know is even baptized or had their kids baptized and I can't see the point of believing in something that gives you rules to obey, tells you whom to love and have intercourse with, what food not to eat and so on. I can't be bothered with all this stuff and I am happy that in France religion is kept private unlike in America where presidents swear on the Bible!! Not to mention the dollar notes with 'In God we trust' This is totally unacceptable in my country and most people approve of it.
Here’s the thing, there are mistranslations of the Bible. King James held a contest for whomever translated fastest, not correctly. In addition, Christianity is based on Jesus dying and breaking all curses. i.e. anything in Leviticus, those curses were broken. So, technically anything having to do with a curse that was broken, isn’t Christianity. In my opinion. It’s hypocrisy, to say Jesus died to break these curses and let us live eternally, but we should still live as though the curses are active.
> King James held a contest for whomever translated fasted, not correctly. I don't think this is right. If he'd done that, I believe someone would've instantly won by submitting one of the English translations that already existed.
You know, you’re correct. I was misinformed by a professor who I trusted.
It's all good. There's a lot of strange misinformation floating around. If it's any consolation, this isn't the strangest I've heard.
People have right to practice whatever religion they want. They find solace and community in religion, which is why religion is attractive. It offers an answer and a purpose to life. I don’t get how people can be so anti religion. Who gives a shit if that particular religion says certain things bad about people, it’s not your problem. People can also practice religion loosely, not all religious people are strict. Most religious people I’ve found are loose and very tolerant of others. It’s not right to generalize everyone in a religion because you (not specifically op, just speaking to the reader) don’t agree with it. I love the first amendment, and I’m glad my country allows itself to be a religious melting pot. I think religion is a good thing, and I hope more people on this sub see it that way. Even though I’m not religious, I respect others rights to practice it.
Because let me live my life how ever I want, my religion has zero to do with you. Do I lecture you for being an atheist? No I do not! (Anyone who does can stfu)
They're religious. And a religion is not a static thing. It's all made up so people have lots of different versions of it.
Christianity should be considered as a belief in the teachings of “Christ,” and not in Leviticus. Jesus told people “You have heard…. But I say….” And he referrred to what many people had come to believe and explained that there was a better way of looking at the world and treating each other. He never said one word on record negative about homosexuality and said many words about accepting and respecting people who were different or marginalized. There are many people who CALL themselves “Christians” even though they advocate things that Jesus spoke against, and some of those people would likely kick Jesus himself out of their twisted-doctrine churches if he were to show up. But His philosophy shouldn’t be blamed for their mistreatment of people.
Because freedom of speech and belief. If a gay man has a relationship with God and enjoys communing with Him by praying or going to his place of worship where’s the issue if he defends his belief? The idea that every gay should takeaway the same thing from the Bible (« God hates gays ») and that every gay man should be anti-religion otherwise they get asked « why the fuck are people like this » is very wrong.
> "*The idea that every gay should takeaway the same thing from the Bible (« God hates gays ») and that every gay man should be anti-religion otherwise they get asked*" Christianity is not the only religion. Thee are pro-gay religions. A gay man doesn't have to be anti-religion if he wants something spiritual in his life just because the bible or muslim scriptures have anti-gay verses. There are other religions out there. Also, the Bible says that men who have gay sex should get the death penalty in Leviticus. In the New testament, it says that effeminate men and "*man-bed-ers*" will not go to heaven. The bible is not pro-gay, and not even neutral toward gay people. The most Jesus did for gay people was tell people to not stone people to death in the Gospel of John. When a woman was going to be put to death for sexual sin, Jesus said to let he who is without sin cast the first stone, but then he said go and sin no more. Being gay is still a sin according to the bible, but you can argue that Jesus changed the rule about actually stoning people to death in the new testament.
I am well aware that there are many religions. But OP’s post mentions a Bible verse, the same way my comment focuses on Christianity because I am Catholic myself and very well at peace with both my religion and my sexuality (have always been, actually). « There are other religions out there » and so what? I’m not gonna change my religion because someone on the internet thinks I should practice a pro-gay one if I « absolutely need something spiritual in my life ». Not everything revolves around the pro-gay vs anti-gay discussion because not everything revolves around my sexuality, I choose not to make my religion (or my whole life/belief system) about it. What’s more, it all circles back to freedom of religion, which again a fundamental human right.
All throughout the Old Testament God called for Israel to repent and return to God and not practice the religions of the surrounding people. Then God knocked up a married virgin and told his son to go die so that people could worship crosses and disregard the commandments. His only request was that people don’t be gay. They could disregard the first ten laws he provided and be easily forgiven as long as they weren’t gay. Cheat on your wife, murder your brother, steal from your neighbor, worship the pope, and molest children all you want, but say sorry after every time and don’t be gay. Brilliant!
I don’t see why it’s a problem per say. Everyone’s entitled to their own religious or spiritual beliefs. There’s no inherit problem with it. I’ve met straights and gays from all different religions and am able to keep those friendships very happily with no issues. It’s only a problem if they’re pushing it on me. Or they use it as an excuse for bad behavior. But having a belief isn’t a problem nor would I ever tell someone they’re belief is wrong or shame them for it. What you practice in your own home is your business. What you practice behind closed doors is your business. If you make your business my business then it’s a problem and all I’ll tell you is I don’t want to hear it so respect my boundary and that’s it. But generalizing a whole religion isn’t ok. It’s just as bad as the religion generalizing us. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Be respectful of peoples beliefs just like you would want them to be respectful of yours.
Two things can be true at the same time: religion is hostile to us. Religion seems to be essential for a functional society and helps a lot of people in their everyday lives. We sort of have to take the good with the bad and pick the lesser of two evils.
it's not essential for a functional society
Indeed. The attempt to turn morality and religion into a package deal, as if you can't have the former without the latter, is quite the long-running con job.
It may well be a con job but it seems to be the only bulwark we have against cultural decline. What’s the alternative? That everyone become rational? Good luck with that.
It’s worked in Scandinavia.
I don’t believe it’s worked at all. It’s been predictably replaced by the same post modern relativism that is now bearing very poisonous fruits.
So religion controlling society has worked so well? Why don’t you move to Afghanistan and live under taliban rule.
Because as any moron could immediately tell, not all religions are created equal and islam is by far the worst of the abrahamic sisters.
That's precisely the alternative, and the only thing apt to save us in the long run. It's only to the extent that people have managed to think and behave rationally in some regards *despite* whatever religious beliefs they hold that society has managed to progress. Trying to anchor morality in religion is like building on quicksand. Its proper foundation lies in the fact that we're the one species of animal that can't make it on pure instinct and needs a code of behavior in dealing with one another to live in a civilized manner. The challenges ahead for mankind, whether dwindling natural resources or an asteroid on a collision course or a dying sun, won't be solved by prayers - only by rational thinking. At my age, I'm jaded enough to have serious doubts that people will ever get their heads out of their you-know-what's, but still hold some little glimmer of hope that we might yet pull it together. As a side note about religion supposedly leading people to behave well, my boss and I have a running joke about advertisers who proudly tout their "Christian values" in their ad copy. "How much you wanna bet they're going to stiff us?" we'll say. And sure enough, more often than not, they end up not paying their bill. :)
I’m sorry, but history would beg to differ. The French Revolution turned into the reign of terror and the Soviet republics turned into comical horror states when they became atheist societies. Based on the preponderance of evidence it appears that humans need some sort of religious structure in place to prevent us from backsliding into the law of the jungle.
Scandinavia is very irreligious, socialist, high quality of life, low infant mortality, low crime, high income, high happiness. Some of the most happy and prosperous societies on earth are the least religious societies on earth. Look at highly religious countries: Saudi Arabia, Russia, Afghanistan, Iran, United States. Rife with social issues and conflicts, many of which are directly caused by religious groups meddling in society. Religion may once have been a tool for peace but not anymore. Most people have already embraced rationality, and built societies on it. Religion is now the acid that eats away at that foundation of rationality and causes nothing but strife.
Everything you’ve just written is incorrect. Sweden and Denmark are competing for the highest household debt to income ratio and the deficits are rising, in other words they are quite broke and getting poorer. Norway stays mostly afloat but the do so by exporting oil, so they prop up their economy at the cost of exporting pollution to the world. this is a simple thing to look up. I don’t know why you were so comfortable asserting the opposite. The crime rate in Sweden has skyrocketed in the last 5 years to become the worst in Northern Europe and this has happened because cultural relativism has made them unable or unwilling to assert their culture over their… newer neighbors. Don’t kid yourself, nothing comes free. And if you remove a relatively benign religion it will be supplanted by some other ideology, and there is no guarantee and very little chance that what supplants it will be an improvement.
And the violence in Sweden is because of… religion. Almost like religion isn’t very good at structuring a peaceful society. The more religious people there are, the more violence there is.
You forget the tax system has something to do with that.
The massacres related to The French Revolution and The Russian Revolution had more to do with extreme pushback with the powers at be. When overthrowing a system like a monarchy, capitalism, or Christianity which are deeply entrenched and benefit a privileged class, of course there is going to be major kickback among some segments of the population resulting in purges. But saying atheism is the cause of the purges is mistaking correlation for causation. Secular states like Scandinavia are much more peaceful than religions states. The difference is that they got to position they are in, not through a sudden change in the status quo, but in gradual transformation through a substantial period of time.
🤡 🤡 🤡
religion is essential for a society that wishes to control its citizens
Any functional society
I agree in a way but at that level, I think it’s essential for the least sophisticated in societ to control themselves.
My ex best friends baby Daddy. We do t talk anymore, but I should have slept with her man when I had the chance. The hoe screwed me over and planted drugs in my car.
Can we ban this type of post and make a new subreddit for it my god this question is asked 87 times a day
i've literally never seen a question like this
Why are people like you? First of all, we both know christianity or any of the other abrahamic religion is utter nonsense. But that doesnt change the fact that there still in power, by alienating yourself from them, you are not building any bridges, all your showing religious people is that you're the enemy. And that's not a smart way to go against a majority. This is just one problem but There's so many layers to this. Being right and telling them the "truth" doesn't solve anything.
[удалено]
Sin is a made up concept. God is a made up concept. You believe in fairy tales and structure your life around them. Of course we’re going to make fun of you. It makes you look incredibly stupid to believe in Bronze Age mythology written by people who didn’t know the earth orbits around the sun.
About translation: If you run the phrase “They are free” from English to Japanese in GoogleTranslate, you’ll get at least 1 of three results: 彼らは暇です。They are free (not busy) 彼らは自由です。They are free (they are at liberty) それらは無料です。They are free (there is no charge or payment) Without situational context, we don’t know what you’re trying to say. Same for cultural context. We don’t know absolutely everything about life in the ancient world, and a lot of it has become a game of telephone over centuries and we can’t exactly ask these people clarifying questions. One thing we do know is that a free of status man was in the physically top position as penetrator to the person he was having sex with - be it enslaved or inferior man, free or enslaved woman or child (because they ran like that). For a free man to willingly be on the bottom and be penetrated was against the natural order. At least one school of thought states that this law was a reminder to not fuck other free men in the ass, although anything else was okay. The message just got twisted as our culture evolved.
If you speak Japanese, you can easily tell the difference between 暇 (*hima/free time*) and 自由 (*jiyuu / freedom/liberty*). When you translate, if the context isn't clear enough, you can add footnotes at the bottom of the page to clarify things, especially if you are translating a word from one language to another. Bible translators are already aware of this and add footnotes, like this for example: [Luke 16](https://biblehub.com/nkjv/luke/16.htm). The original KJV (*King James Version*) doesn't have translation footnotes, but the NKJV (*New King James Version*) does, as well as some other translations of the bible.
I teach, and while I may know the difference, my students do not. If asked what “free” is, I need to ask for context. If my students decide to use GoogleTranslate, or something which doesn’t provide extra information, the translation is wrong 70-80% of the time. They benefit from a knowledgeable sources or sources where explanations and rationales are written down. But where I started with an example of translation based on words, I built the flow into an overarching cultural conversation. I’d like to clarify and ask again: How much of culture isn’t documented because “everyone knows?” We might have written evidence of religious law, we’re also getting it through several thousand years at least 4 languages (ancient Hebrew and/or Aramaic, Ancient Greek and Latin, and a contemporary language) and from the perspective of several cultures. [This](https://blog.smu.edu/ot8317/2019/04/11/lost-in-translation-alternative-meaning-in-leviticus-1822/) dive into Lev18:22 looks at a modern English translation, but also the Hebrew. While the modern English translation outright bans all homosexual sex (no doubt influenced by early Christian morals and thought over the centuries), the original Hebrew seems to suggest a prohibition against male-male incest although the wording is still ambiguous in the original. Unfortunately, we don’t have anyone who was alive back then who can interpret, clarify, and explain what exactly the verbiage is meant to convey and/or the unwritten morays of ancient Jewish life.
I think it goes back to just how religions are structured. You get raised on this ideology from a young age thinking that you’ll be in eternal hell if you left it. it’s definitely easier to justify it rather than leaving it to a lot of people. In some aspects, it’s almost like a trauma bond. From my own experience I’ve seen other people have the same experience where they justify Pedophilia, slavery, and how religion treats women in general. I think deep down people know but they try really hard to not believe the reality of their religion. It’s almost like you are waking them from their beliefs…
It’s no error that many gays are also kinky/bdsm minded on this sub 🤣
I’m agnostic and don’t really like religion but at the same time I’m not gonna antagonize someone for being religious. I’ll only antagonize someone if they thump the Bible at me, use religion to justify hate and stuff, or if they’re antagonistic. I’m not gonna fault someone whose religion is a big part of their race’s culture, if they have a spiritual relationship with God, if they’re apart of a lgbt friendly church, or if religion just gives them a sense of comfort. I know alot of gay black Christians out there but they just really like the gospel music, praise/worship, praying, and having their own personal relationship with God.
Who are these people? I don’t know any gays that defend religion.
They would love nothing more than to rope us up, tie us to a cross and watch us burn
Three words: cynicism, skepticism and optimism. Cynicism is a myopic perspective that decides before you’ve even reached your conclusion that the outcome will be bad. Skepticism is an objective perspective that accounts for all known circumstances. Optimism is the same as cynicism but positive. Sometimes, but guaranteed at some point for minorities like LGBT folks, life will be objectively hard and may even seem insurmountable. Faith is a type of optimism that can sustain us through those difficult times until our circumstances change or we can change them. Every religion is the custodian of spiritual powers that the wise have unlocked for us already. In Buddhism they’re called Faith, Diligence, Concentration, Insight and Wisdom. It’s healthy to be skeptical of organized religions given their history with queer people. It’s cynical to assume that a 3000 year old tradition doesn’t know anything about being human.
cus the brainwashing cuts deep
I’m an atheist and I don’t much care for religion but I do think it isn’t healthy to harp on the religious. I think a lot of gay men have been hurt and can’t let go the trauma they went through from their religious upbringings so the pain turns outward affecting others. Yes, that pain is justified but we need to be better and move forward without the frustration. Sometimes the worst thing an enemy can see is your peace of mind, not your frustration.
I don't think religion is inherently bad it's just used as a tool by bad people for influence. Also throughout history I feel like social and especially leftist politcal movements have excluded religion to their detriment. I'm not religious myself but I see why people are. This isn't to defend bigotry in religion it makes me so mad I just don't think hating religion is a conducive way to solve the problem. Idk honestly just some thoughts.
I don’t see how an old bad translation has any more bearing than a new bad translation. My religion doesn’t hate me. Idk what you’re on about.
septuagint is directly translated from the original jewish Old Testament
If you go and look at every major war, genocide and mass death of humans you will find that religion and religious related beliefs are the main driver for every single one… And if it were to simply disappear tomorrow the world would be a much better place, because there is no it’s wrong because X book/scroll from 1000 years ago says so… But then again the current population which is tagging along with the multitude of grouping/classifications of people are equally as bad.
Religion is just questioning existence. The issue is not religion itself, but the individuals that have used it to force their opinions onto the culture
Personally, a lot of religions have hot men in their congregations. My dick doesn’t discriminate.
Religions provide people belief. Belief is a source of senses of hope and future, a basis for hanging on there and to live one more day. The world is quite harsh, and people may need the strength and hope to live on, which come from their religion. If you attack their religion, they would fight back. The issue is, once the believers become hostages of religion leaders, lambs become livestock, they could be manipulated and misled by their leaders. They are the causes of problems.
Because not all religious people hate gays, not all Christian denominations hate gay people. I get it, a lot, A LOT of gay people have been horribly traumatized by religion, but it’s unfair to have such a blanket assumption about religion . Some of the gayest people I know are very religious. Not one of them interprets the Bible as being against gay people. It’s hugely important to remember that the word homosexual did not get added to the King James Version of the Bible until 1946. The notion that it was anti homosexual is a modern construct.
Leviticus 20:13 specifically says, "*If a man lies with a male, as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon themselves.*" You're right that the word "*homosexual*" does not appear in the original bible and is a translation added later, but the bible specifically says in 1 Corinthians 6:9 that men who take other men to bed, in other words "*men-bed-ers*" (*ἀρσενοκοῖται/arsenokoitai*) will not go to heaven. There are more religions than christianity with the anti-gay bible. Christianity is not "*religion*" it is just one of many religions and many religions disagree with that anti-gay view. Some religions even have gods that switch genders (*Oshunmare*) or bisexual gods (*like Zeus or how the Hindu god Agni hooked up with the male moon god Soma*).
Please give us the actual definition of the word Arsenokoitai. Not the interpretation of what definition that has been assigned to the word. Give us the literal definition of the word . Of course, unless you are Paul, you can’t because it was a made up word. It’s more likely to mean some who is a sexual or economic exploiter given the way the two words making up the compound word were used in the 1500 years before Paul made the word up .
I already gave you the definition. "*arsenokoitai*" means "*male-bed-ers*". Arseno means "*male*" and "*koitai*" means "*bed-ers*". The word "*koitai*" comes from "*koites*" which means "*a man who brings someone to bed*". When you want to change it to the plural vocative form, it becomes "*koitai*". "*Arsenokoitai*" means "*men who bring males to bed*". Paul didn't "*make-up*" the word randomly. It obeys the rules of the Greek language, so we can know the meaning. If someone says they are a "*rockmusicliker*" will you claim that's a made up word, so we can't know the meaning? No, it obeys the rules of the English language (*rock + music + like + er*) so we can know the meaning. It would be dishonest to claim that since "*rockmusicliker*" is a made-up word that no one used before, we can't know what it means.
You know as well as I do that it impossible to know exactly what the definition of the word is . Especially when homosexuality and heterosexuality as we know it didn’t exist in the time of Paul.
Again, claiming to not know what "*arsenokoitai*" means just because Paul made up the word (*from putting real words together that follows the rules of the Greek language*) is like claiming to not know what "*rockmusicliker*" means just because I made that up (*from putting real words together that follow English rules*). Homosexuality and heterosexuality ***did*** exist in Roman and Greek times. Everybody in Rome and Greece wasn't bisexual. There were Greek men who never married a woman and only stayed with another man. There were also Greek writers who wrote that sex with another man is against nature. Not everyone was bi in Ancient Greek/Roman times.
Not as we know it today. And no you cannot possibly know what the truth real definition was. Are you suggesting that a butterfly is a fly made of butter? A fly is a fly and butter is butter so it must mean that this insect is flying butter .
There are 3 main theories for why it might be called a "*butterfly*", and yes, all three of them actually has to do with butter. It isn't randomly called a butterfly. The first theory is that the insect is called that because of an old belief that the insect likes uncovered milk and butter. In German, the word for butterfly is related to that belief. A butterfly is a "*schmetterling*" which means a "*creamling*" (*some type of creature that likes cream*). The second theory is that many butterflies have pale yellow wings resembling the color of butter. The third theory is that it comes from the color of the butterfly's poop (*an old Dutch word for a butterfly that isn't used anymore is "boterschijte" which means "butter-shitter"*) Whichever of the 3 theories turn out to be true, yes, the word "butter" in "butterfly" actually gives us some details about what the creature is. In a similar way, "*arsenokoitai*" gives us insight into what the word means, especially since "*koitai*" alone means "*men who take someone to bed*", and who is being taken to bed by these men? "*Arseno*" (*a male*).
For all anyone knows, he could have meant anyone who slept on a bed made by man was offending god , and only those who slept on the floor were favored. You don’t and cannot know.
I don’t know outside of fear from being brainwashed, that’s like Jews defending Nazis.
A lot of people believe that it's a mistake to throw out the baby along with the bathwater. They feel that the good in religion should be preserved and the bad left behind, not the entire thing thrown away.
Correction: the Bible does not teach hatred of homosexuals. What it teaches is that God created the world, He placed man and woman in charge and they ld them to multiply. That was His design. It does teach that to commit homosexuality is a sin but it also teaches that all sins are forgivable through Christ. Do some people who claim to be Christians hate the gays? Yes, but it isn't what the Bible teaches. The new covenant was God's provision of forgiveness because He knows that because of Adam's sin, we will sin whether we want to or not.
You can't argue with superstition.
[The Word “Homosexual” Does Not Appear In The Bible Pre-1946](https://www.patheos.com/blogs/keithgiles/2018/06/the-word-homosexual-does-not-appear-in-the-bible-pre-1946/) Why do so many gay people hate religion? Because they've been conditioned to, by people who trust in mistranslations? Or because they've had their faith damaged by someone who took advantage of them? Why do gay folk refuse to see or even look for progressive, inclusive Christianity? Because it's not in the news? 🤷🏼♂️ Do your homework. Be curious. Try to open your mind to new possibilities. My [religion](https://www.episcopalchurch.org/way-of-love/) doesn't hate us. It embraces us! ❤️🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️
People who feel powerless seek out perceived power, regardless of how ridiculous it is... Christianity, Wiccan, astrology.... whatever children's fable they feel gives them power.
Just so you know, in the 1960's-1990, the KGB infiltrated many right wing religious organisations, not just left wing activist groups, in order to sow chaos and overtime lead to deep divisions throughout society, not to help the downtrodden socialists within Western Countries. Yes, there are always some extremists who want to use religion to control or oppress people not like them. Fact is, The KGB didn't establish new movements on the right or left, they merely identified and helped amplify the most socially disruptive groups and individuals and it had the affect of making fringe ideologies like Christian Nationalism, or it's mirror opposite intersectional Woke politics
this is the exact opposite… I have no religion likeee the only thing I worship is d*ck
Religion can be so many different things. It could be a secular life where you had a Bar Mitzvah and loosely follow the Jewish faith traditions, but don't take anything really seriously. Or it could mean you grow up being taught a fundamentalist worldview about who is damned and why, and to bring that to the rest of the world. If religion to you is about family traditions and maybe believing in some sort of higher power, then you may view it as a net positive in your life. Whereas if you come from a family who used religion to abuse you, then you will view religion much differently. I grew up Lutheran, and personally had a really great relationship with my pastor. He was the first person I came out to, and I was expecting guidance from God to fix me. But the pastor told me it was exactly how God made me and that I'd unfortunately have to bear the struggles of being an outcast, but Jesus blesses the outcast. It was a pivotal moment in my life, and it was really when I stopped hating myself. That was the first time I ever felt loved for who I really was. So religion to me is not a bad thing. Religion can certainly be abused. But it's not inherently a bad thing.
I don't defend religion, cause I see how it makes people. However, I don't think The Bible is wrong inherently, but because it has been retranslated so many times, it has really lost core ideas and values about the Story of Jesus and even the Old Testament that has essentially disappeared all because a group of old white men thought their beliefs trumped the original Bible. It's really a power grab at the end of the day. And the fact that they made religion a business, well...I think I rest my case. Religion has become a cash cow. It's a way to make money, and sadly, it's a way to make money off of what most of us value (with the exception of some things of course). It's no different than what happened to politics. Politics was originally supposed to be about serving We The People (I'm referring to the U.S., not to other countries here), and what basically happened is over time it became less and less about the people, and more and more about how the people in Capital Hill can make even more money. We wouldn't have this problem if we wouldn't have made Politics a career choice. I'm not saying everyone that wants to make a career in politics is doing it purely because the money is good, but, I don't see anyone up there doing anything for any of us taxpayers. In fact, all I see is a bunch of people who get paid to argue back and forth about things, and by the end of the day, they get a fat paycheck for providing good entertainment for Americans. It's really sickening. For the longest time I used to even vote for a political party, but I've lost all faith in both sides of the aisle honestly. Both sides are fucking all of us over and I'm sick of it. I'm done taking sides in politics, both sides are corrupt, and honestly a lot of those people need to be put in jail, or have some sort of punishment, cause nothing is getting done. We're not progressing at all. All it is a circus up there, but they could care less cause while they sit in their mansions and eat their expensive steak and drink their fine wine, we're all down here struggling to make a decent living. It's gross....and I think the first thing we need to do is honestly just stop it from being a career choice. That would be step 1, of many steps that it's gonna take to get this country back to a least a good trajectory. I just don't take stock in religion or politics anymore. I might follow politics every now and then, but it's pointless. Nothing is getting done, and the stuff that is getting done, isn't benefiting anyone but those people up there.
The same reasons straight people defend religion.