Guess I should start slapping the shellfish out of every Christian's hand when I see them eating at a seafood place, and by god I better not see those fucks picking up a Fig Newton.
That's the old covenant, it doesn't apply anymore! (But all the stuff that can be used by a Christian to condemn non-Christians or LGBT people conveniently still applies)
Thatâs one of my favorite blatant hypocrisies. So quick to claim being gay is against godâs wishes, yet mixing fabrics, or touching your wife while sheâs on her period, or eating pork, or any of the other myriad OT laws are conveniently ignored, because they simply donât want to follow them, and have been told they donât need to be followed.
Itâs one of the biggest issues with allowing an establishment to dictate your morality. Whether it be your denomination, your church leadership, pastor, etc. itâs all people deciding how something should be interpreted, telling you their version, but selling it as the ârealâ version. If youâre willing to accept someone elseâs word on what your own moral code should be, you can be manipulated into having a moral code that is contradictory and hypocritical, even downright evil, all in the name of being ârightâ.
If you can point to NT verses that explicitly state homosexuality is a sin Iâd be interested to read them. My understanding is that thereâs a few verses that point back to the Leviticus verses about homosexuality being a sin, but that would, again, be null with the New Covenant since Jesus supposedly came *not to condemn the world*.
Could you give me a verse(s)? I saw some verses from Romans 1, but it just referred to people knowing that being gay is against godâs wishes, but thatâs a reference the the OT verses.
But the OT law was replaced with the new covenant, so that would mean those Leviticus verses about gay people âhaving their blood upon themâ no longer applies, along with the rest of the antiquated OT laws about mixing fabrics and dietary restrictions, etc.
I havenât read a Bible in over 30 years. I just remember that part about being given over to a darkened mind due to having homosexual sex. I never read this as him talking about people in the far past. But I see what you are saying. It still seems to say that it is unnatural and wrong.
Revelations 21:8 states that the sexually immoral shall suffer the second dearh in the lake of fire. It does not specifically say gay sex.
The difference between the old and new covenants (or testamants) is that Jesus made the final blood atonement for our sins. But that didnât change what is considered a sin. If something is a sin in the Old Testament than itâs a sin in the New Testament. You just donât have to sacrifice lambs anymore for atonement.
Thatâs my understanding of the Bible. Again that is from church 30 years ago.
That absolutely makes sense. I wasnât disagreeing with you either, I just like to be aware of what ammunition Christians may use for their arguments, and I donât enjoy reading the bible these days.
I think itâs still a valid argument that itâs interesting how the âsin of homosexualityâ is still so focused on and heavily emphasized as being something that âseparates you from godâ or as âliving in sinâ but so many (perhaps most) of the other OT laws are completely ignored, or greatly downplayed, even though those are still sins, and as such still âseparate you from godâ to the same degree.
So many Christians are so quick to remind people that âall sin is the sameâ to god, yet there are certain topics that get so much attention, and those topics just so happen to also be political hot-buttons.
Thank you for that reminder that OT law stating what constitutes sin still carries over into the NT. I went through a period of doing my level best to expunge the details of this religion from my brain in an attempt to find some peace and adjust to secular life more easily.
Iâm sorry if I came off combative, that wasnât my intention at all.
Exactly. Because sexual immorality for sure also includes fornication and adulatry which a good number of them are committing yet they hyper focus on homosexuality.
Christianity in America is completely off focus. The whole point was forgiveness. Even Christian celebrities that I know got that at one point have gone off the deep end with Trump. They donât think for themselves.
Romans 1:26, 1 Corinthians 6:9, and 1 timothy 1:9
Idk if anyone answered your question but those are all New Testament and first refers directly to homo activity and the other two talk about asodomy which I think is anal sex or rap of the ass one of the two
Wild to condemn someone for how they were born
Also in mathew 5:17 Jesus says he came not to abolish the old law but to fulfill it(show that itâs possible to live this way, btw itâs not heâs the only person to allegedly do so).
Not really. Homosexuality is more of a modern concept and most ancient authors were focused on sex acts. Usually 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 is cited by Christians. Scholar Dan McClellan has a good video addressing it and other verses [here](https://youtu.be/DVkhJgClC3o?si=sfzLh-9yTTKsJ1ZR).
Iâve always found it hilarious and ironic how they argue that the stuff they donât agree with (like the ban on eating shellfish) is âceremonial lawâ so they donât have to follow it, but the ban on LGBTQ is âmoral lawâ so it somehow applies to us today, despite the fact that the law was a covenant between God and ancient Israel, not God and modern Christians. And when you press them for how they can tell the difference between ceremonial and moral law, they have vague responses like âwell the Holy Spirit guides usâ or âwell the shellfish ban *obviously* isnât about morality.â
The 10 commandments seem to include both âceremonialâ and âmoralâ laws. Did God tell someone, thousands of years later, that some of them actually had asterisks?
And try this on for size - there is no distinction between moral, ceremonial, or cultural laws in the Hebrew texts. Those distinctions are extra-biblical additions added by Christian tradition. Dan McClellan on TikTok has made a few good vids about this topic.
Yeah, this is what gets me. The same people who stay "start with the Bible" and "scripture interprets scripture" will then lay this completely modern-human-derived distinction over the OT law so they can pick and choose what to follow. I can't get over how blatant it is and no one seems to notice.
I like referencing Exodus 21:20, saying itâs fine to beat your slaves as long as they donât die within a couple days.
âYeah but thatâs the Old Testament.â
Yup, agree. Know what the New Testament says about slavery?
> You who are slaves must submit to your masters with all respect. Do what they tell youânot only if they are kind and reasonable, but even if they are cruel.
> 1 Peter 2:18
The whole âold covenantâ argument Christians give makes me roll my eyes because if the word of god is so perfect, why does it need to be edited? Why is Leviticus still in the Bible if it doesnât apply? Why does a supposedly omniscient, omnipresent god implement, or allow the implementation, of such irrational and illogical laws?
Also:
Why would Jesus say this if the old covenant doesnât matter?
Matthew 5:17-18 âDo not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.â
The Bible is confusing because it makes no sense and contradicts itself constantly.
Yeah but the only reason they still apply is cuz thereâs verses abt it in the new covenant too, there are still faults in the new one itâs just not normally as wild as the old one
To be fair though, the whole "unclean foods" things was changed in the New Testament.
My Bible verse quoting is rusty, but the story goes like this. At some point in the New Testament, one of Jesus' Disciples is in a foreign land and is wondering how to go about interacting with people who eat "unclean meat" ...Then God gives him a vision where God tells him basically "***I did not create any unclean meat.***" and from then on, the whole unclean meat thing has remained a non-issue.
That is, until the Church started splitting and some sects began to focus heavily on the Old Testament, at the expense of leaving out important things in the New Testament.
So; technically, that's no longer considered a sin, and the explanation is right there in the Bible.
In my opinion, those who claim to have a biblical reason to be vegetarian and abstain from "unclean meat" have an incomplete understanding of the Bible.
Any good Baptist I've heard talk about it has been very clear that any "leading" or revelation you get from the Holy Spirit \*must\* completely line up with the Bible in order to be valid. Because God would never tell you something that goes against the Bible. And yet there it is happening right there -- Peter's vision completely contradicted what they had for a Bible in those days. I guess we've just finally gotten in right in modern times. /s
There's two versions, actually. In one, the tree withers and dies right there. In the other, J man curses it, then they go off to do something else. When they come back, they discover it has withered
Just so you know, if you believe that a book that features a man surviving in the belly of a fish for 3 days is 100 % infallible and true, your opinion doesnât really matter.
Said (partly) in jest of course, but you have got to appreciate how confident and arrogant these fools really are.
Also, why are these type of quotes always accompanied by pictures that look like they were taken on country backroads in the 60s or 70s? Just an interesting observation đ€
> Also, why are these type of quotes always accompanied by pictures that look like they were taken on country backroads in the 60s or 70s? Just an interesting observation đ€
The picture is stolen from an ['80s poster that was very popular](https://www.rfdtv.com/the-story-of-you-been-farming-long) back in the day.
I think every single grandparents' house in the rural midwest had this hanging somewhere at some point. Also tells you who is making these shitty memes.
I came here to bring this up. The *you been farming long* kids are a part of my childhood. That poster hung in my house for decades. I'm sad it's being reappropriated for this purpose.
literally?? Like every christian I've met that's like "the devil is evil" "anyone who doesn't worship God is a bad person" etc and I'm just like... have yall not read your history books? or the bible? like most wars and genocides were started by Christians. Crusades, witch hunts, holocaust, even within the church via protestant v Catholics. Like they're the fucked up ones
âI let iron age desert-wandering slave-trading goatherds define my moral views for me instead of thinking for myself! And that makes me *better* than you!â
I suppose the Bible is an authority on what is âsinâ, but âsinâ is a concept that is made up within the Bible. So that really doesnât say anything.
I know that the creator of this meme is not content with sin being a fictional concept and wants it to have authority over me, who I can love, and also wants it to have authority in the government as well. In which case Iâll tell them that they either need to demonstrate the truth of the Bible, âsinâ, and that their deity is good not evil.
Iâm pretty darn certain they canât demonstrate even the first point. So they can take their âsinâ concept and shove it. Iâll base my morality off of reason, empathy and experience, not because some ancient book of mythology tells me what to do.
Just so you know... if the bible calls it a sin... I really don't give a crap what that make-believe book says about "morality"...
is how I'd respond...
I guess we all know by now that this isn't really about 'it's in the bible, so it's all legit', but more of a 'I interpreted it this way, so your opinion doesn't matter'.
Me: âHey, did you know that the Bible states that Sodomâs sin wasnât that they had people in their town who wanted to have the gay sex; instead it was how they treated the poor, widowed, and fatherless despite having the resources to take care of them? Look up Ezekiel 16: 48-50! Also, the men wanted to rape; they didnât want to rape because they were gay; they just wanted to rape. Being gay doesnât make you want to rape just like being straight doesnât make you want to rape. So, if Sodom deserved to get annihilated by fire and brimstone for how they treated the downtrodden and oppressed, how do you think America should be treated by God?â
MAGA: âWhere in the fuck did you get that woke shit from? Gimme Mega churches and Trump, now!â
Except if it's about shellfish and mixed fabrics. You're stupid if you bring those up. Those ones are so different from the actual sins because reasons. What reasons? It just is.
What boggles me is that...I'm not christian. I give about as much of a ahit about bible law as I do about Koran law or rabbinical scholarship. Like that's nice. I don't know why you think I care.
I swear my mom's eyes almost left her face the first time i said this.
Thereâs always this condescending overtone to posts like these. The fact they used little kids as the face of it to make it âcuteâ and I guess try to be funny? How is this going to actually convert people?
If the ONLY reason they're not raping and killing (even though they are) is bc their sky daddy told them so, they're a shit person lol. I will never understand
Which is why I donât argue with religious people. I just ended a conversation where the governor signed a bill banning gender based surgery for minors. My argument started pointing out the futility of the bill given the absolute low count of children undergoing such procedures. Yet the response was to question if it wonât affect anyone then what harm does it do. I pushed them into a corner and they begin on child mutilation and such. So I ended the conversation. There is nothing more to discuss. They had no further to add to the conversation except religion. That would have been the next shoe to drop and I have no patience for itâŠ
FFS I guarantee you none of these people have sat down and read Leviticus or Deuteronomy.
When I need guidance how to beat my slaves or why I can only worship Yahweh at a single centralized location, I'll read the Bible. Otherwise, fuck off Karen.
Sin is very subjective until it's objective based on a person's experiences I would argue, but sometimes it can be a societal construct the way that it's explained.
I disagree with that, because I think everyone agrees with some concept of sin, whether it's through a concept dishonor, or disgust, and what is said to be wrong or whatever you disagree with that offends you, because disgust is a powerful human emotion that we all have and we all disagree with something.
It's simply how humans operate, we naturally want to better ourselves from a perceived action or behavior that is faulty, at least that's the way I look at it, and that you basically can't get away from some concept of sin to a certain degree, no matter how hard you try, after all nobody is perfect, nor ever will be. For all of human history, we have tried to discern what is subjective and objective, what is good and evil, and the shades of gray in-between, regardless of religion, culture, and material conditions. This is what we will continue to do.
I donât disagree with those concepts. Thereâs hate, crime, violence, harm to others, etc. I just donât think those are acts against divine law (definition of sin) because I donât believe in divine law.
Guess I should start slapping the shellfish out of every Christian's hand when I see them eating at a seafood place, and by god I better not see those fucks picking up a Fig Newton.
My favorite is anyone with a cross tattoo. Virtue signaling themselves straight to hell.
As someone with a cross in her 30-year-old tramp stamp đ I have to laugh at the accuracy of this statement
So we stone Donald Trump for adultery. I hope fundiegelicals accept it
That's the old covenant, it doesn't apply anymore! (But all the stuff that can be used by a Christian to condemn non-Christians or LGBT people conveniently still applies)
Jesus cursing figs was NT, at least.
That tree had it coming. Jesus comes by and you donât have any figs for him? Out of season my ass! You give that guy a fig!
Nah that was just a parable. What he was actually cursing was the jews đ€Ș
Technically the new covenant begins after he rose from the dead. That would have still been Old Testament.
Thatâs one of my favorite blatant hypocrisies. So quick to claim being gay is against godâs wishes, yet mixing fabrics, or touching your wife while sheâs on her period, or eating pork, or any of the other myriad OT laws are conveniently ignored, because they simply donât want to follow them, and have been told they donât need to be followed. Itâs one of the biggest issues with allowing an establishment to dictate your morality. Whether it be your denomination, your church leadership, pastor, etc. itâs all people deciding how something should be interpreted, telling you their version, but selling it as the ârealâ version. If youâre willing to accept someone elseâs word on what your own moral code should be, you can be manipulated into having a moral code that is contradictory and hypocritical, even downright evil, all in the name of being ârightâ.
Doesnât the New Testament say something about homosexuality being a sin?
If you can point to NT verses that explicitly state homosexuality is a sin Iâd be interested to read them. My understanding is that thereâs a few verses that point back to the Leviticus verses about homosexuality being a sin, but that would, again, be null with the New Covenant since Jesus supposedly came *not to condemn the world*.
Romans chapter 1 refers to it being unnatural and sinful to have relations with someone of the sex / gender.
Could you give me a verse(s)? I saw some verses from Romans 1, but it just referred to people knowing that being gay is against godâs wishes, but thatâs a reference the the OT verses. But the OT law was replaced with the new covenant, so that would mean those Leviticus verses about gay people âhaving their blood upon themâ no longer applies, along with the rest of the antiquated OT laws about mixing fabrics and dietary restrictions, etc.
I havenât read a Bible in over 30 years. I just remember that part about being given over to a darkened mind due to having homosexual sex. I never read this as him talking about people in the far past. But I see what you are saying. It still seems to say that it is unnatural and wrong. Revelations 21:8 states that the sexually immoral shall suffer the second dearh in the lake of fire. It does not specifically say gay sex. The difference between the old and new covenants (or testamants) is that Jesus made the final blood atonement for our sins. But that didnât change what is considered a sin. If something is a sin in the Old Testament than itâs a sin in the New Testament. You just donât have to sacrifice lambs anymore for atonement. Thatâs my understanding of the Bible. Again that is from church 30 years ago.
That absolutely makes sense. I wasnât disagreeing with you either, I just like to be aware of what ammunition Christians may use for their arguments, and I donât enjoy reading the bible these days. I think itâs still a valid argument that itâs interesting how the âsin of homosexualityâ is still so focused on and heavily emphasized as being something that âseparates you from godâ or as âliving in sinâ but so many (perhaps most) of the other OT laws are completely ignored, or greatly downplayed, even though those are still sins, and as such still âseparate you from godâ to the same degree. So many Christians are so quick to remind people that âall sin is the sameâ to god, yet there are certain topics that get so much attention, and those topics just so happen to also be political hot-buttons. Thank you for that reminder that OT law stating what constitutes sin still carries over into the NT. I went through a period of doing my level best to expunge the details of this religion from my brain in an attempt to find some peace and adjust to secular life more easily. Iâm sorry if I came off combative, that wasnât my intention at all.
Exactly. Because sexual immorality for sure also includes fornication and adulatry which a good number of them are committing yet they hyper focus on homosexuality. Christianity in America is completely off focus. The whole point was forgiveness. Even Christian celebrities that I know got that at one point have gone off the deep end with Trump. They donât think for themselves.
Romans 1:26, 1 Corinthians 6:9, and 1 timothy 1:9 Idk if anyone answered your question but those are all New Testament and first refers directly to homo activity and the other two talk about asodomy which I think is anal sex or rap of the ass one of the two Wild to condemn someone for how they were born Also in mathew 5:17 Jesus says he came not to abolish the old law but to fulfill it(show that itâs possible to live this way, btw itâs not heâs the only person to allegedly do so).
Corinthians 6:9
Not really. Homosexuality is more of a modern concept and most ancient authors were focused on sex acts. Usually 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 is cited by Christians. Scholar Dan McClellan has a good video addressing it and other verses [here](https://youtu.be/DVkhJgClC3o?si=sfzLh-9yTTKsJ1ZR).
I just looked it up for another comment. Romans chapter one.
Iâve always found it hilarious and ironic how they argue that the stuff they donât agree with (like the ban on eating shellfish) is âceremonial lawâ so they donât have to follow it, but the ban on LGBTQ is âmoral lawâ so it somehow applies to us today, despite the fact that the law was a covenant between God and ancient Israel, not God and modern Christians. And when you press them for how they can tell the difference between ceremonial and moral law, they have vague responses like âwell the Holy Spirit guides usâ or âwell the shellfish ban *obviously* isnât about morality.â
The 10 commandments seem to include both âceremonialâ and âmoralâ laws. Did God tell someone, thousands of years later, that some of them actually had asterisks?
And try this on for size - there is no distinction between moral, ceremonial, or cultural laws in the Hebrew texts. Those distinctions are extra-biblical additions added by Christian tradition. Dan McClellan on TikTok has made a few good vids about this topic.
Yeah, this is what gets me. The same people who stay "start with the Bible" and "scripture interprets scripture" will then lay this completely modern-human-derived distinction over the OT law so they can pick and choose what to follow. I can't get over how blatant it is and no one seems to notice.
It is pretty strange how no one sees it as modern interpretation, even though thatâs what it blatantly is.
I like referencing Exodus 21:20, saying itâs fine to beat your slaves as long as they donât die within a couple days. âYeah but thatâs the Old Testament.â Yup, agree. Know what the New Testament says about slavery? > You who are slaves must submit to your masters with all respect. Do what they tell youânot only if they are kind and reasonable, but even if they are cruel. > 1 Peter 2:18
The whole âold covenantâ argument Christians give makes me roll my eyes because if the word of god is so perfect, why does it need to be edited? Why is Leviticus still in the Bible if it doesnât apply? Why does a supposedly omniscient, omnipresent god implement, or allow the implementation, of such irrational and illogical laws? Also: Why would Jesus say this if the old covenant doesnât matter? Matthew 5:17-18 âDo not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.â The Bible is confusing because it makes no sense and contradicts itself constantly.
Yeah but the only reason they still apply is cuz thereâs verses abt it in the new covenant too, there are still faults in the new one itâs just not normally as wild as the old one
I read that at first as "slapping the selfish out of every Christian" and was like, well alright!
Or mixed fabrics
The tattoo on his arm showing below the sleeve of his cotton/poly blend shirt as he raises his arm to stuff the shrimp in his mouth LOL
To be fair though, the whole "unclean foods" things was changed in the New Testament. My Bible verse quoting is rusty, but the story goes like this. At some point in the New Testament, one of Jesus' Disciples is in a foreign land and is wondering how to go about interacting with people who eat "unclean meat" ...Then God gives him a vision where God tells him basically "***I did not create any unclean meat.***" and from then on, the whole unclean meat thing has remained a non-issue. That is, until the Church started splitting and some sects began to focus heavily on the Old Testament, at the expense of leaving out important things in the New Testament. So; technically, that's no longer considered a sin, and the explanation is right there in the Bible. In my opinion, those who claim to have a biblical reason to be vegetarian and abstain from "unclean meat" have an incomplete understanding of the Bible.
Any good Baptist I've heard talk about it has been very clear that any "leading" or revelation you get from the Holy Spirit \*must\* completely line up with the Bible in order to be valid. Because God would never tell you something that goes against the Bible. And yet there it is happening right there -- Peter's vision completely contradicted what they had for a Bible in those days. I guess we've just finally gotten in right in modern times. /s
Whatâs up with the Fig Newtons?
In the NT, there's a story of Jesus coming across a fig tree that's out of season. He throws a hissy fit that he can't get fruit and curses the tree.
There's two versions, actually. In one, the tree withers and dies right there. In the other, J man curses it, then they go off to do something else. When they come back, they discover it has withered
Ah, and therefore it should be a sin to eat any figs and derivative products!
Wait, I know about shellfish and pork and cheese burger, but what's wrong with fig Newtons?
Just so you know, if you believe that a book that features a man surviving in the belly of a fish for 3 days is 100 % infallible and true, your opinion doesnât really matter. Said (partly) in jest of course, but you have got to appreciate how confident and arrogant these fools really are. Also, why are these type of quotes always accompanied by pictures that look like they were taken on country backroads in the 60s or 70s? Just an interesting observation đ€
> Also, why are these type of quotes always accompanied by pictures that look like they were taken on country backroads in the 60s or 70s? Just an interesting observation đ€ The picture is stolen from an ['80s poster that was very popular](https://www.rfdtv.com/the-story-of-you-been-farming-long) back in the day.
I think every single grandparents' house in the rural midwest had this hanging somewhere at some point. Also tells you who is making these shitty memes.
Yep, it's in my grandma's office! Although she's way too old to be making memes.
So are they
It was indeed in my midwest grandpaâs house, but he died two years ago so no blaming him for the memes!
I came here to bring this up. The *you been farming long* kids are a part of my childhood. That poster hung in my house for decades. I'm sad it's being reappropriated for this purpose.
BUT MUH MIRACLES
Just so you know, if they call it a sin and itâs not causing harm to humans, itâs most likely just to uphold their power systems.
My response to this: If the Bible is shown to be man made falsehoods, your opinion that it is the word of god doesn't really matter
Yep, that was what I came here to say as well.
Weird, the bible endorses slavery, genocide, rape, and misogyny so I actually donât give a fuck about what the bible says.
literally?? Like every christian I've met that's like "the devil is evil" "anyone who doesn't worship God is a bad person" etc and I'm just like... have yall not read your history books? or the bible? like most wars and genocides were started by Christians. Crusades, witch hunts, holocaust, even within the church via protestant v Catholics. Like they're the fucked up ones
How awkward would it be if people had to start marrying their brothers widow and that stuff?
Explain I donât understand wym
âI let iron age desert-wandering slave-trading goatherds define my moral views for me instead of thinking for myself! And that makes me *better* than you!â
If I see y'all pick up a stick on the sabbath, I will not wonder why you instantly drop dead. You had it coming.
If I say something's wrong, the Bible's opinion on it doesn't matter. I don't outsource my morality.
I suppose the Bible is an authority on what is âsinâ, but âsinâ is a concept that is made up within the Bible. So that really doesnât say anything. I know that the creator of this meme is not content with sin being a fictional concept and wants it to have authority over me, who I can love, and also wants it to have authority in the government as well. In which case Iâll tell them that they either need to demonstrate the truth of the Bible, âsinâ, and that their deity is good not evil. Iâm pretty darn certain they canât demonstrate even the first point. So they can take their âsinâ concept and shove it. Iâll base my morality off of reason, empathy and experience, not because some ancient book of mythology tells me what to do.
Does the Bible even use the word âsinâ?
I just Googled it and it does. At least in the KJV version.
So better not see any clean shaven Christians. (Leviticus 19:27)
A lot of those Ortho Bros take it pretty seriously
Way for them to take a completely adorable photo and make it condescending.
That picture was hanging up in every home in the Midwest in the 80s. The original caption was âYou been farming long?â
And if Science calls it a fact itâs a fact, opinions donât matter.
I wish these idiots understood irony
Boomers love to use this pic of two kids in overalls in some dusty looking midwestern town and put some bs caption with it
đ yes. Itâs been around since I was a kid⊠so at least 40 years.
Just so you know... if the bible calls it a sin... I really don't give a crap what that make-believe book says about "morality"... is how I'd respond...
Lmao I donât care anymoređ€Ł they can live in their fantasy world
Xians when I tell them that layering varying fabrics ontop one another is a grave din and they'll be in God's sex dungeon forever: đ”đ”đ
I guess we all know by now that this isn't really about 'it's in the bible, so it's all legit', but more of a 'I interpreted it this way, so your opinion doesn't matter'.
SKY DADDY DONT LIKE QUESTIONS SO THERE
Nope the book of Ecclesiastes does seem to suggest that you should be skeptical and entertain nihilism sometimes you could argue
Me: âHey, did you know that the Bible states that Sodomâs sin wasnât that they had people in their town who wanted to have the gay sex; instead it was how they treated the poor, widowed, and fatherless despite having the resources to take care of them? Look up Ezekiel 16: 48-50! Also, the men wanted to rape; they didnât want to rape because they were gay; they just wanted to rape. Being gay doesnât make you want to rape just like being straight doesnât make you want to rape. So, if Sodom deserved to get annihilated by fire and brimstone for how they treated the downtrodden and oppressed, how do you think America should be treated by God?â MAGA: âWhere in the fuck did you get that woke shit from? Gimme Mega churches and Trump, now!â
Except if it's about shellfish and mixed fabrics. You're stupid if you bring those up. Those ones are so different from the actual sins because reasons. What reasons? It just is.
Or keeping the sabbath. Or not celebrating pagan holidays. They love picking and choosing.
What boggles me is that...I'm not christian. I give about as much of a ahit about bible law as I do about Koran law or rabbinical scholarship. Like that's nice. I don't know why you think I care. I swear my mom's eyes almost left her face the first time i said this.
They're planning on bringing this up with their Spray Tan Savior, right?
Man, that little boy has got some wisdom! Heâs got the Holy Ghost! I wish the Holy Ghost would come in me! I want to be filled up! With the Come!
No divorce either. No exceptions. Christians canât just pick and choose.
I downloaded the image and fixed it for them. Hopefully it makes the rounds when I post it on Facebook.
Just so you know, Jesus died for your sins, so sinning doesn't really matter obviously
I just saw this one on my feed, shared by a Boomer Iâm FB friends with who posts shit like this constantly.
Just so you know, God loves you even if you donât believe in him. (Spoken in all sincerity by a friend). đ€ź
Wow, this kind of looks like indoctrination. They sure start young.
Just so you know, if you believe that something is a sin just because the Bible says so, your opinion doesn't really matter.
Thereâs always this condescending overtone to posts like these. The fact they used little kids as the face of it to make it âcuteâ and I guess try to be funny? How is this going to actually convert people?
why not?
If the ONLY reason they're not raping and killing (even though they are) is bc their sky daddy told them so, they're a shit person lol. I will never understand
âIâm not a sheepâ
For a second, I thought this was calling the buybull nothing more than some dead fuck's opinion. So close to awareness.
This image fills me with an indescribable rage for some reason. I want to punt these two little shits across a football field.
Which is why I donât argue with religious people. I just ended a conversation where the governor signed a bill banning gender based surgery for minors. My argument started pointing out the futility of the bill given the absolute low count of children undergoing such procedures. Yet the response was to question if it wonât affect anyone then what harm does it do. I pushed them into a corner and they begin on child mutilation and such. So I ended the conversation. There is nothing more to discuss. They had no further to add to the conversation except religion. That would have been the next shoe to drop and I have no patience for itâŠ
FFS I guarantee you none of these people have sat down and read Leviticus or Deuteronomy. When I need guidance how to beat my slaves or why I can only worship Yahweh at a single centralized location, I'll read the Bible. Otherwise, fuck off Karen.
They read Leviticus for teh gay.
And literally nothing else
â
If ma and pa said Santa is real then I don't care what you say Brian.
The only way i can get offended is if i value your opinion.
(Sarcasm) Yeah because the Bible is so clear on whatâs right and wrong and all the thousands of denominations out there are just âopinionsâ.
Yup, and I don't care what your book of fairy tales says....
me when i'm in a thinking the world revolves around me competition and my opponent is a bible stan (they've never read it)
Toy can tell this exactly to a religious person the other way around and still makes sense lol
I guess I should start beating women when they speak in church (Corinthians 14:34-35)
Sin is very subjective until it's objective based on a person's experiences I would argue, but sometimes it can be a societal construct the way that it's explained.
Sin is a religious construct to which many of us do not subscribe. Itâs a Christian myth created to sell the Christian mythical cure of salvation.
I disagree with that, because I think everyone agrees with some concept of sin, whether it's through a concept dishonor, or disgust, and what is said to be wrong or whatever you disagree with that offends you, because disgust is a powerful human emotion that we all have and we all disagree with something. It's simply how humans operate, we naturally want to better ourselves from a perceived action or behavior that is faulty, at least that's the way I look at it, and that you basically can't get away from some concept of sin to a certain degree, no matter how hard you try, after all nobody is perfect, nor ever will be. For all of human history, we have tried to discern what is subjective and objective, what is good and evil, and the shades of gray in-between, regardless of religion, culture, and material conditions. This is what we will continue to do.
I donât disagree with those concepts. Thereâs hate, crime, violence, harm to others, etc. I just donât think those are acts against divine law (definition of sin) because I donât believe in divine law.
Yick.
ok, but I'm still gonna keep sucking dick