[002]
TwinBird
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I\'ve moved the \
to:
I\\\'ve moved the \\\"literature\\\" entry for the Bible to \\\"mythology,\\\" since there\\\'s an extensive entry on it there, and no one reads the Bible for literary value - even in its own language, most of it is fairly dry, and in modern language, it\\\'s been translated to hell and back. Also, I\\\'ve cleaned up the {{Natter}}, and as for this sub-entry:
* The Bible\\\'s full of this actually. There\\\'s all sorts of things people \\\"know\\\" that have little or no basis in scripture. Stuff like the biblical condemnation of homosexuality (there are arguably two homosexual love stories, David and Jonathan and Ruth and Naomi, Jesus in all his 33 years on earth couldn\\\'t be bothered to say one single thing about it), the fact that fallen angels are demons (this is never stated, the opposite in fact, as the fallen are said to be bound in everlasting chains), Satan being the same as Lucifer (never stated), and even God\\\'s omniscience (God often questions and in Exodus, Moses talks him into changing his mind). The book isn\\\'t as clear as {{The Fundamentalist}} would have you believe.
I\\\'ve removed it entirely. Just wrong, wrong, wrong, right down the line. It\\\'s written in a crufty way \\\"The Bible\\\'s full of this actually,\\\" and the points are pretty much all wrong.
*The biblical condemnation of homosexuality (there are arguably two homosexual love stories, David and Jonathan and Ruth and Naomi, Jesus in all his 33 years on earth couldn\\\'t be bothered to say one single thing about it).
Male homosexuality is a death penalty offense under Mosaic law. Male and female homosexuality are both attacked by Paul in Romans. The form of male homosexuality generally practiced by the Romans is attacked by Paul in Corinthians, and even if it weren\\\'t, he spends the rest of the epistle attacking desires of the flesh in general. There is no legitimate question that any Christian sect that considers Paul divinely inspired should not condone homosexuality. One thing that\\\'s true - unlike his attacks on dietary laws and the death penalty, Christ said nothing about homosexuality. There\\\'s a case to be made for David and Jonathan, but (ironically, since the Old Testament has nothing against lesbians) Ruth and Naomi, who are \\\'\\\'in-laws\\\'\\\', require quite a reach.
* The fact that fallen angels are demons (this is never stated, the opposite in fact, as the fallen are said to be bound in everlasting chains).
...maybe. Christ describes him as having \\\"fallen from Heaven,\\\" but this may just be him coming down to wreak havoc.
* Satan being the same as Lucifer (never stated).
This was up before and it led to a fight. The page posted identifies them both together by a common metaphor of, wait for it... falling from Heaven. The first one, however, can be read as a metaphor, involving no angel or demon at all, and the second can be read as I\\\'ve just said.
* Even God\\\'s omniscience (God often questions and in Exodus, Moses talks him into changing his mind).
Mainstream Christianity holds these questions as rhetorical, and Moses (do you mean Abraham?) changing his mind isn\\\'t necessarily incompatible, depending on your definition of \\\"omniscience.\\\" Isaiah, the Psalms, and Christ all make reference to God\\\'s omniscience.
* The Bible\\\'s full of this actually. There\\\'s all sorts of things people \\\"know\\\" that have little or no basis in scripture. Stuff like the biblical condemnation of homosexuality (there are arguably two homosexual love stories, David and Jonathan and Ruth and Naomi, Jesus in all his 33 years on earth couldn\\\'t be bothered to say one single thing about it), the fact that fallen angels are demons (this is never stated, the opposite in fact, as the fallen are said to be bound in everlasting chains), Satan being the same as Lucifer (never stated), and even God\\\'s omniscience (God often questions and in Exodus, Moses talks him into changing his mind). The book isn\\\'t as clear as {{The Fundamentalist}} would have you believe.
I\\\'ve removed it entirely. Just wrong, wrong, wrong, right down the line. It\\\'s written in a crufty way \\\"The Bible\\\'s full of this actually,\\\" and the points are pretty much all wrong.
*The biblical condemnation of homosexuality (there are arguably two homosexual love stories, David and Jonathan and Ruth and Naomi, Jesus in all his 33 years on earth couldn\\\'t be bothered to say one single thing about it).
Male homosexuality is a death penalty offense under Mosaic law. Male and female homosexuality are both attacked by Paul in Romans. The form of male homosexuality generally practiced by the Romans is attacked by Paul in Corinthians, and even if it weren\\\'t, he spends the rest of the epistle attacking desires of the flesh in general. There is no legitimate question that any Christian sect that considers Paul divinely inspired should not condone homosexuality. One thing that\\\'s true - unlike his attacks on dietary laws and the death penalty, Christ said nothing about homosexuality. There\\\'s a case to be made for David and Jonathan, but (ironically, since the Old Testament has nothing against lesbians) Ruth and Naomi, who are \\\'\\\'in-laws\\\'\\\', require quite a reach.
* The fact that fallen angels are demons (this is never stated, the opposite in fact, as the fallen are said to be bound in everlasting chains).
...maybe. Christ describes him as having \\\"fallen from Heaven,\\\" but this may just be him coming down to wreak havoc.
* Satan being the same as Lucifer (never stated).
This was up before and it led to a fight. The page posted identifies them both together by a common metaphor of, wait for it... falling from Heaven. The first one, however, can be read as a metaphor, involving no angel or demon at all, and the second can be read as I\\\'ve just said.
* Even God\\\'s omniscience (God often questions and in Exodus, Moses talks him into changing his mind).
Mainstream Christianity holds these questions as rhetorical, and Moses (do you mean Abraham?) changing his mind isn\\\'t necessarily incompatible, depending on your definition of \\\"omniscience.\\\" Isaiah, the Psalms, and Christ all make reference to God\\\'s omniscience.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I\'ve moved the \
to:
I\\\'ve moved the \\\"literature\\\" entry for the Bible to \\\"mythology,\\\" since there\\\'s an extensive entry on it there, and no one reads the Bible for literary value - even in its own language, most of it is fairly dry, and in modern language, it\\\'s been translated to hell and back. Also, I\\\'ve cleaned up the {{Natter}}, and as for this sub-entry:
* The Bible\\\'s full of this actually. There\\\'s all sorts of things people \\\"know\\\" that have little or no basis in scripture. Stuff like the biblical condemnation of homosexuality (there are arguably two homosexual love stories, David and Jonathan and Ruth and Naomi, Jesus in all his 33 years on earth couldn\\\'t be bothered to say one single thing about it), the fact that fallen angels are demons (this is never stated, the opposite in fact, as the fallen are said to be bound in everlasting chains), Satan being the same as Lucifer (never stated), and even God\\\'s omniscience (God often questions and in Exodus, Moses talks him into changing his mind). The book isn\\\'t as clear as {{The Fundamentalist}} would have you believe.
I\\\'ve removed it entirely. Just wrong, wrong, wrong, right down the line. It\\\'s written in a crufty way \\\"The Bible\\\'s full of this actually,\\\" and the points are pretty much all wrong.
*The biblical condemnation of homosexuality (there are arguably two homosexual love stories, David and Jonathan and Ruth and Naomi, Jesus in all his 33 years on earth couldn\\\'t be bothered to say one single thing about it).
Male homosexuality is a death penalty offense under Mosaic law. Male and female homosexuality are both attacked by Paul in Romans. The form of male homosexuality generally practiced by the Romans is attacked by Paul in Corinthians, and even if it weren\\\'t, he spends the rest of the epistle attacking desires of the flesh in general. There is no legitimate question that any Christian sect that considers Paul divinely inspired should not condone homosexuality. One thing that\\\'s true - unlike his attacks on dietary laws and the death penalty, Christ said nothing about homosexuality. There\\\'s a case to be made for David and Jonathan, but (ironically, since the Old Testament has nothing against lesbians) Ruth and Naomi, who are \\\'\\\'in-laws\\\'\\\', require quite a reach.
* The fact that fallen angels are demons (this is never stated, the opposite in fact, as the fallen are said to be bound in everlasting chains).
...maybe. Christ describes him as having \\\"fallen from Heaven,\\\" but this may just be him coming down to wreak havoc.
* Satan being the same as Lucifer (never stated).
This was up before and it led to a fight. The page posted identifies them both together by a common metaphor of, wait for it... falling from Heaven. The first one, however, can be read as a metaphor, involving no angel or demon at all, and the second can be read as I\\\'ve just said.
* Even God\\\'s omniscience (God often questions and in Exodus, Moses talks him into changing his mind).
Mainstream Christianity holds these questions as rhetorical, and Moses (do you mean Abraham?) changing his mind isn\\\'t necessarily incompatible, depending on your definition of \\\"omniscience.\\\" Isaiah, the Psalms, and Christ all make reference to God\\\'s omniscience.
* The Bible\\\'s full of this actually. There\\\'s all sorts of things people \\\"know\\\" that have little or no basis in scripture. Stuff like the biblical condemnation of homosexuality (there are arguably two homosexual love stories, David and Jonathan and Ruth and Naomi, Jesus in all his 33 years on earth couldn\\\'t be bothered to say one single thing about it), the fact that fallen angels are demons (this is never stated, the opposite in fact, as the fallen are said to be bound in everlasting chains), Satan being the same as Lucifer (never stated), and even God\\\'s omniscience (God often questions and in Exodus, Moses talks him into changing his mind). The book isn\\\'t as clear as {{The Fundamentalist}} would have you believe.
I\\\'ve removed it entirely. Just wrong, wrong, wrong, right down the line. It\\\'s written in a crufty way \\\"The Bible\\\'s full of this actually,\\\" and the points are pretty much all wrong.
*The biblical condemnation of homosexuality (there are arguably two homosexual love stories, David and Jonathan and Ruth and Naomi, Jesus in all his 33 years on earth couldn\\\'t be bothered to say one single thing about it).
Male homosexuality is a death penalty offense under Mosaic law. Male and female homosexuality are both attacked by Paul in Romans. The form of male homosexuality generally practiced by the Romans is attacked by Paul in Corinthians, and even if it weren\\\'t, he spends the rest of the epistle attacking desires of the flesh in general. There is no legitimate question that any Christian sect that considers Paul divinely inspired should not condone homosexuality. One thing that\\\'s true - unlike his attacks on dietary laws and the death penalty, Christ said nothing about homosexuality. There\\\'s a case to be made for David and Jonathan, but (ironically, since the Old Testament has nothing against lesbians) Ruth and Naomi, who are \\\'\\\'in-laws\\\'\\\', require quite a reach.
* The fact that fallen angels are demons (this is never stated, the opposite in fact, as the fallen are said to be bound in everlasting chains).
...maybe. Christ describes him as having \\\"fallen from Heaven,\\\" but this may just be him coming down to wreak havoc.
* Satan being the same as Lucifer (never stated).
This was up before and it led to a fight. The page posted identifies them both together by a common metaphor of, wait for it... falling from Heaven. The first one, however, can be read as a metaphor, involving no angel or demon at all, and the second can be read as I\\\'ve just said.
* Even God\\\'s omniscience (God often questions and in Exodus, Moses talks him into changing his mind).
Mainstream Christianity holds these questions as rhetorical, and Moses (do you mean Abraham?) changing his mind isn\\\'t necessarily incompatible, depending on your definition of \\\"omniscience.\\\" Isaiah, the Psalms, and Christ all make reference to God\\\'s omniscience.
