Comments by "MBKKT 90" (@mbkkt9094) on "Liberal Christians vs Conservative Christians | Middle Ground" video.

  1. Every Christian picks and chooses from the Bible, ignoring parts and placing more importance on some parts than others
    50
  2. It's completely open to interpretation
    24
  3. No, it's progressive Christians versus conservative Christians...
    11
  4. God kills plenty of babies in the Bible
    9
  5. Don't forget about the fact that slavery is condoned and never condemned in the Bible
    8
  6. Plenty of people may be reassured knowing proper safety precautions were taken. Not everybody is an anti-science conspiracy theorist
    6
  7.  @martinandkaylaanderton  What is facts?
    6
  8. Who are you to determine who is or is not and actual Christian?
    6
  9. How is being homosexual sinful? What harm is caused by two people of the same gender entering a loving relationship?
    5
  10. Huh? Nobody was pushing anything. If anything the opposite is true. LGBTQ youth raised in strict religious households are far more likely to contemplate or attempt suicide
    4
  11. Fiction: Christianity
    4
  12. How so?
    4
  13. Every Christian picks and chooses what they want from the Bible
    3
  14.  @beingroxy  It is most definitely not a cop out. Christians are claiming the existence of something, that if true would fundamentally change the entire world's understanding of the very nature of reality. I think asking for proof is fair. And if God is as mighty as people claim, you could deny his existence upon witnessing it?
    3
  15.  @studentofthesaviors.o.s  What valid reason would one have to think a relationship between two adults of the same sex is wrong?
    3
  16. Says who?
    3
  17. How do you know they were filled with the Holy Spirit?
    3
  18. Well first of all, there are plenty of contradictions in the Bible. But let's say two people both struggle with understanding a Biblical passage,both pray on it and both claim to have been pointed towards different answers. How do we know who is correct?
    3
  19. That's how everybody uses the Bible...
    3
  20. "You can’t be a liberal and be a Christian". Why not?
    3
  21. Oh dear. You are going to have to excuse a lot of horrible stuff if you believe every words has to be taken literally and never changes
    3
  22. Does one have to be Christian to comment on Christian viewpoints?
    3
  23.  @alldayrj2k_939  It is homophobic
    3
  24.  @chigasaki06  How do you know they were inspired by the Holy Spirit?
    3
  25.  @ylsfad3720  It most certainly was not. You are perhaps referring to the rules laid out for owning Israelite as slaves. It was 7 years and there were ways around it that would allow you to keep the slave forever. If you were a prisoner of war or from another tribe no such 7 year rule applied
    3
  26. Well let's be fair, I would hope nobody is "pro abortion", they are "pro-choice". That issue could be applied to taxation as a whole. Should somebody who doesn't want to pay taxes still have to? Of course. If they want to continue to benefit from living in that society the need to contribute to it financially.
    3
  27. Morality doesn't come from God. Basically every society in the world has laws against murder, theft etc.
    3
  28. Seems like there are definitely some parts of the Bible it would be beneficial to subtract...
    3
  29. No it's not. Being a homophobe is however
    3
  30.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  The Bible also condones the taking of prisoners of war as slavery, the beating of slaves and provides examples of when the seven year rule need not be obeyed. So it condones taking somebody against their will, forcing them to work for you, beating them and not releasing them. What a lovely book....
    3
  31. Yes it is. Clue's in the name
    3
  32.  @joyven8591  How do you know the Bible is God's word?
    3
  33. @Çaesar Right, so my book makes a claim that Christians will hate it's content. When they do, they have validated the entire book and therefore given validity to its claim that I am the Messiah, right? Just following your logic
    2
  34. Because their actions, informed by their faith, impact everybody
    2
  35. Which is why I have always been confused why so many self-confessed Christians in the States seem to support the Death Penalty and the NRA
    2
  36. Ah, so straight couples who can't or don't want to have children shouldn't get married in the church?
    2
  37. I agree with Maksie. Being European, hearing Americans rail against universal healthcare whilst clearly understanding nothing about it is a strange mixture of amusing and saddening
    2
  38. So....?
    2
  39. Tell that to the Republican party
    2
  40. Progressive Christians = Recognize there are valuable messages to be found in a holy text, that can still be applied to the modern world Conservative Christians = Refuse to get with the times, even if it means accepting some of the horrors the Bible contains
    2
  41. There clearly is. 3 of them are in the video buddy
    2
  42. What exactly within the progressive movement is "harmful to the order of mankind in any age of existence"?
    2
  43. Why wouldn't any reasonable person support it?
    2
  44.  @ellapoota9630  "Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve"? My what a charming little rhyme. Did you make it yourself? What demonstrable harm is caused by a loving same-sex couple getting married?
    2
  45. When?
    2
  46. " And yes some church folk can be nasty but this doesn't mean we "make up an idea" of what God is like by our own will". Well let's be fair. As God's existence remains unproven everybody's idea of him is technically made up
    2
  47. Were "irresponsible"? Wow....
    2
  48. Being gay, bi or trans isn't a sin to "overcome" at all
    2
  49.  @ejm821  Why would I listen to the Bible on this. It's just common sense
    2
  50.  @ejm821  Yeah, of course I am. Any self respecting Christian should ask themselves that question as well, shouldn't they?
    2
  51.  @ejm821  You don't think Christians should ever examine their own faith? So you just follow blindly with no thought involved? How sad
    2
  52.  @ejm821  Because you see the Bible as guide, to be put in context, not complete fact to be taken literally. You agree with the moral teachings of the Bible?
    2
  53. Right? It's nice to see Christians actually rejecting blind faith and recognizing that love is love
    2
  54.  @cameronbritton685  How are they not brainwashed if they're Christian? Christian indoctrination is a pretty common thing
    2
  55. What exactly is wrong with a same sex relationship?
    2
  56.  @Noloyiso_M  How is cheating on a partner in a sexual relationship comparable to entering a loving relationship with somebody of the same gender?
    2
  57. Why would you want to worship a God who will destroy people on a whim?
    2
  58.  @BuildingApologetics  I am familiar with both arguments and of Christian apologists' affinity for both, I find neither convincing and as somebody who seems to enjoy this topic you must know the multitude of criticisms levied against both arguments?
    2
  59.  @BuildingApologetics  Let's start with the Kalam The truth of your first premise is indeterminate. Through modern science, specifically physics, natural phenomena have been discovered whose causes have not yet been discerned or are non-existent The argument also suffers from the fallacy of composition: what is true of a member of a group is not necessarily true for the group as a whole. Just because most things within the universe require a cause/causes, does not mean that the universe itself requires a cause. For instance, while it is absolutely true that within a flock of sheep that every member ("an individual sheep") has a mother, it does not therefore follow that the flock has a mother. There is an equivocation error lurking in the two premises of the Kalām version of the argument. They both mention, in your wording, something "beginning to exist". The syllogism is only valid if both occurrences of that clause refer to the exact same notion. In the first premise, all the things ("everything") that we observe beginning to exist form by some sort of transformation of matter or energy, or a change of some state or process. So this is the notion of "beginning to exist" in the first premise. In the second premise there is no matter or energy to be transformed or reshaped into the universe. (We are probably speaking of something coming from nothing.) The two notions of "beginning to exist" are thus not identical and therefore the syllogism is invalid.
    2
  60. How is it a fact?
    2
  61. Every Christians picks and chooses from scripture though
    2
  62. If the whole world was not heterosexual and cis-gendered, childbirth wouldn't just stop. How do you think gay couples have babies currently? And there are many biblical scholars who believe that verse has long been mistranslated and it is not that man shall not lie with man, but with boy. It is condemning relationships with young children
    2
  63. And your basis for this claim is what?
    2
  64. Don't debate the Bible? So do you believe the Bible is 1005 true? Unchanging?
    2
  65.  @lenalove8138  Ok. So you, for example, are ok with the practice of slavery, as the Bible is?
    2
  66.  @sunkyokim6052  It is most certainly a problem with Christianity
    2
  67.  @sunkyokim6052  Right. But to determine that they are false pastors you would first have to prove things like that Jesus was in fact killed and rose and that the Bible is the literal word of God. And that cannot be done
    2
  68. It's hardly a free choice though, is it? If a non-religious person choose a life of celibacy, it may not be easy but that is their free choice. In Angel's situation, he is choosing this with what he believes to be the threat of eternal hell hanging over his head. It's sad.
    2
  69. Nah, I'm good.
    2
  70.  @jesusislord1560  Brother? Why would you call me that? And what "right path" would that be?
    2
  71.  @jesusislord1560  Why do you keep calling me brother? Are you under the impression I am male? And why would you ask someone to show me mercy? Are they about to do something horrible to me?
    2
  72.  @reynarobles4384  "I’m done . Go figure it out" Usually said by those who weren't expecting to be called out on their claims And yours is a huge on to make. I can't see anything in Sanger's life history to support that. Sounds like mere conspiracy to me
    2
  73.  @snowflake3129  And that's fine. The problem is however where one's belief crosses over into another's life and starts to cause them unhappiness
    2
  74.  @redphoenix9468  I never said you were conservative.... Of course the non-religious can comment on religion. Actions informed by their faith affect everybody. For example, if I am gay and I am unable to get married because a Christian lobby is preventing law being passed, I can definitely be critical of the faith.
    2
  75. Says who?
    2
  76.  @lotus9865  Got a quote?
    2
  77.  @lotus9865  Do I? Ok. So?
    2
  78.  @lotus9865  Your little cousin has an interest in epistemology? How interesting
    2
  79.  @lotus9865  Ah ok. So how are she and I similar?
    2
  80.  @scottsmith3236  Right, so you are just ignoring the fact that the Bible permits owning somebody and beating them....?
    2
  81.  @scottsmith3236  A person owned by another as property
    2
  82. "Not believing that the whole Bible is the word of God is dangerous". But what reason is there to believe every word is the word of God?
    2
  83. Says who?
    2
  84. ​ @ylsfad3720  If during the time your slave was working for him, the master was to find the slave a wife, then when the 7 years was up and time came for the slave to be released, his wife was unable to go with him. Meaning the slave had to choose between freedom or his family. If he chose to stay with his family, then he would now be required to stay with the master for life . They then pierced the slaves ear as proof of this, almost like tagging the ear of cattle. Leviticus 25:44-46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly." So God is a racist I guess who made different rules for his "chosen people" but will allow those from other tribes to be bought and sold as property. and even inherited as property upon death And you speak of fair working conditions? According to the Bible a slave owner is free to beat their slave as they please since the slave is their property. The only condition is that they don't die after a couple of days . Well, that is if they are an Israelite. There is no such protection recorded for slaves of other nations or prisoners of war.
    2
  85.  @roneldell5137  Wow, I thought people had moved past trying to actually use Pascal's Wager in an argument
    2
  86.  @gregstickler3798  Surely an incredibly important one to have? Especially if you are painting those who get an abortion as simply those who " decide to have fun sexually"?
    2
  87.  @sunkyokim6052  What if we are reincarnated? What if there is no afterlife at all? There is no point in dealing in "what ifs" when there is no good reason to suspect they are true
    2
  88. Exactly, you are just born that way
    2
  89. Every Christian cherry picks from the Bible
    2
  90.  @thatboybighoss5658  Bit odd to mention consent when marriage at the time of the Bible was essentially fathers selling off their daughters
    2
  91. Not at all
    2
  92. Well yeah, but when you say "The Bible says" you are also implicitly saying "I believe the Bible is true and the Bible says...". It's all a matter of personal belief and interpretation.
    2
  93.  @JP-dp3kt  I don't know if it's good news as such. What I mean is I see no reason why I should believe that a divine Jesus existed. There is no evidence. And the names of those texts would be great
    2
  94. Two reasons, either he knows it sounds wrong/offensive and he doesn't care, or he is unaware that it is not the correct way to refer to a transgender person, and yet still feels he is educated enough on the subject to speak on it. Either way he comes off looking foolish
    2
  95.  @nicholasgee9127  Not a fair comparison. And an especially odd one to choose when the Bible condones slavery...
    2
  96.  @shanegodman1251  Since when was being pro-choice an exclusively liberal position?
    2
  97. You think Democrats are children of the devil? As in the political party?
    2
  98.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  It says nothing about them repaying their debt. It says the owner is able to beat his slave as the slave is his property. Are you able to provide context to justify that?
    2
  99.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I saw you misinterpret the verse and then give no justification for it. Do you think it is ok to beat your slaves?
    2
  100.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I quoted the King James version. It discusses smiting a servant with a rod. Beating them. It is clear as day. It doesn't matter at all if it was OT. Please answer my other question. Do you think it is ok, or has ever been ok to own and beat slaves?
    2
  101.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  What? How are you still misreading this verse after all this time? It doesn't say the slave owner has to die. It says if the slave dies as a result of the owner beating them, the owner will be punished. If the owner beats the slave and it doesn't end in death, that is permissible. It is not actively encouraging beating as such, but it is condoning it as a moral, justifiable act. It doesn't state anything at all about the slave having to have done something bad to receive a beating. It simply says the owner is free to beat them as they like as the slave is their property. Just draws the line at killing. And it does matter. It means that at some point in time God considered both slave owning and the beating of said slaves a moral act. Hence my question. Do you think slavery has ever been morally ok?
    2
  102.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Yeah, it reducing a person to nothing more than property. If you beat somebody so badly they can't work any more, then you have already been punished enough? It's abhorrent. Why do you keep using volunteer and non volunteer slaves as if this makes a difference? If these people were paid full time employees and the bible said you could still beat them as you like, it's still not ok! And do you not understand what condone means? The bible condones and never condemns slavery and it condones the beating of slaves. Seriously never thought I would find somebody defending slavery in this day and age....
    2
  103.  @BigEvan96  Why not? If their church is ok with it what's the problem?
    2
  104. Says who?
    2
  105. @Çaesar That's not proof no matter how many times you post it. Today I have written a book claiming I am the new Messiah, all world religions are wrong and that soon all will bow before me, and one verse states that "Christians will not like this book". If Christians object to the contents of my book, that is proof I am the new Messiah, right?
    1
  106. Never heard of Jeff Durban but David Lynn is far too combative and aggressive a personality to have on here, where measured discussion is required
    1
  107. Ok....
    1
  108. Can I ask why not? So many Christians will say same sex attraction is sinful, but I have never heard a justification for why it should be considered sinful
    1
  109.  @abigailandrade9574  Ok, but why is that a bad thing? What I mean is, if God says murder is wrong, I can see why. Same with stealing. If he says to observe the Sabbath, I guess that makes sense, having a holy day. I can understand all of those. But what is wrong about a loving, same sex relationship?
    1
  110.  @abigailandrade9574  "is for husband and wife to come together in physical union." Ok. So a same-sex couple can just wait until marriage then.
    1
  111.  @abigailandrade9574  Or husband and husband, wife and wife. Why not?
    1
  112.  @abigailandrade9574  And what is that exactly?
    1
  113.  @abigailandrade9574  But explain to me what is so bad about a same sex relationship. Are you unable to?
    1
  114.  @abigailandrade9574  But why should you need to Abigail? You have told me repeatedly now that God made man for woman but you haven't told me how same sex attraction is an inherently bad thing
    1
  115. Who?
    1
  116. @Kueen Kaela Who? And why?
    1
  117. Why not?
    1
  118.  @sososleepyy  I never said "most" Christians support the death penalty, I said many do. And a 2014 survey by the Public Religion Research Institute found that 59% of white Evangelicals, 52% of white Protestants and 45% of White Catholics supported the death penalty as the appropriate punishment for those convicted of murder. Seems like a pretty substantial number of Christians to me...
    1
  119. Every Christian cherry picks
    1
  120.  @ShanqDad  I am not a Christian. But every Christian does cherry pick, whether that be ignoring some parts of the Bible completely or emphasizing some parts excessively over others. It's why there is no unified Christian Church
    1
  121.  @ShanqDad  You analogy doesn't really work here Brian. Why would I need to be a doctor to know what cars it is they drive. Statisticians could find that out through surveys etc. Same applies here. I don't have to be a Christian to know things about or have opinions on Christianity. Many religious scholars are themselves irreligious. And as I pointed out, I feel safe saying that every Christian cherry picks as there is no one, unified Christian Church with the unquestionably correct interpretation of the Bible. Every Church and every believer is taking what they want to find from the Bible and most are claiming that to be true. As there is no clear way to determine who's interpretation is correct, if any, then there is no way to say who is cherry picking in contrast to those following the "correct way", and therefore everybody is simply making their own versions of Christianity
    1
  122.  @ShanqDad  I just explained this to you. I don't have to be Christian to comment on Christian matters. And what do you mean I am not an atheist? I don't believe I ever told you what my position is You don't cherry pick? So you are saying that you alone have the exact, correct understanding of how the Bible is supposed to be read, understood and put into practice? That's amazing. Why aren't you sharing this with the world and uniting all the sects of Christianity?
    1
  123.  @ShanqDad  I can most definitely talk about Christianity and will continue to do so. You really still don't understand the flaws in your logic. If you want to argue that somebody is cherry picking, deviating from an obvious truth and choosing to accept tje truth in its entirety, you must first establish that there is indeed a true, factual position they are deviating from. So how is that you know that your interpretation of the Bible is correct?
    1
  124.  @ShanqDad  You seem to have ignored my last question Brian. If YOU want to claim that progressive Christians are cherry picking from the Bible to make their own, incorrect version of Christianity, you first need to establish that there is indeed a true, correct version that they are deviating from. Can you do that?
    1
  125.  @ShanqDad  Guess you can't do it
    1
  126.  @ShanqDad  You most certainly have not And it is not the responsibility of an atheist to prove anything when it comes to the truth claim that a God exists or that the Bible is his word. That show a fundamental misunderstanding of how a burden of proof works. If YOU want to claim that a God is real, then YOU must prove that claim. An atheist is under no obligation to disprove it at all
    1
  127. ​ @ShanqDad  If you are going to open byu telling me who wrong I am, you should probably ensure that the analogy that follows is indeed correct. A courtroom analogy is often used to demonstrate the burden of proof but you have the roles completely wrong. In this case the Christian would be the prosecutor. Think of it this way.Imagine I accused you of murder. I take you to court. I am the prosecutor, I am the one attempting to make a truth claim. Are you required to prove me wrong? No. It it my job to show a judge or jury beyond a doubt that my claim is in fact true. It is even why courts use the phrase "not guilty: The onus is not on you to prove 100% that you are not a murder, but on me to prove at this point in time that you are. So in this situation the burden of proof lies with you. If you want to claim that a God exists and the Bible is his word, you must prove it. I don't have to disprove it in any way. And you have not even attempted to prove it. You have simply claimed it as fact and have been arrogant enough to attempt to tell me what it is I do and do not know
    1
  128.  @ShanqDad  Right, so just choosing to completely gloss over the fact that you were completely wrong about how a burden of proof works? I would gladly embrace Christianity and Jesus if I actually had any compelling reason to believe that in doing so I would be following something that is factually true. I have given you multiple chances to provide such information and you have failed to attempt to do so, which is quite worrying. You are clearly serious in and passionate about your beliefs, yet when asked why anybody should think what you believe is actually true, your only response is to tell them they already know it is? Sounds like a faith that has not been very well examined
    1
  129.  @ShanqDad  I provided proof for my reasoning that all Christians cherry pick, as I would be expected to when making a claim. You have not provided any evidence that God is real and you still haven't, just maintained that I apparently know it to be true. This is just sad now. You have invested this time into a discussion and are unable to provide a single piece of evidence for God's existence. You say this is for other people to see. There is no reason that any reasonable person would believe in God based on what you have said as you have not offered them a single reason to
    1
  130.  @youtubeisdud2645  How do you know they don't believe in the true gospel?
    1
  131.  @qwertyts  "the fact they can't have reproduce is a medical problem. " Right, and therefore it's God's will that he doesn't want them to reproduce, right? SO he clearly doesn't want them to get married in the church. Yet you are ok with it?
    1
  132.  @qwertyts  Ok, and where would I find the literal word of God?
    1
  133.  @qwertyts  I have a lot of interest in learning. I just see no legitimate reason to think that the bible is the literal word of a deity
    1
  134. Satan's mercenaries? They are Christians too...
    1
  135.  @qwertyts  Every Christian cherry picks from the Bible, progressive Christian or no
    1
  136.  @qwertyts  They most certainly do. It's why there is not a single unified Christian Church
    1
  137.  @qwertyts  And they would say the same about yours, no doubt
    1
  138. Why not?
    1
  139.  @talu9477  Every Christians picks and chooses parts of the Bible to follow or to consider more important., not just progressives
    1
  140.  @talu9477  Yeah, as I said, EVERY Christians picks and chooses. So by your definition there are only "lukewarm Christians"
    1
  141.  @talu9477  Ok. Are you cool with owning and beating slaves?
    1
  142. How so?
    1
  143.  @maddienicole7405  Or they don't see any good reason to read it...?
    1
  144.  @maddienicole7405  Exactly. Why be a Christian at all?
    1
  145. Well it's not exactly hard to use the Bible to justify slavery. The Bible condones it
    1
  146.  @nicholasgee9127  How do you know?
    1
  147.  @nicholasgee9127  How does that show that they "don't love Christ"?
    1
  148.  @nicholasgee9127  How do you know that?
    1
  149.  @nicholasgee9127  What teachings are they not submitting to?
    1
  150. Basically every resident of a nation with universal healthcare who has looked on in morbid fascination as the U.S continues to somehow fail to adopt it, would disagree with you
    1
  151.  @xniks101x  I am from the U.K and that sounds a highly unusual situation to occur. I would imagine there were more factors at play than your short summary suggested
    1
  152.  @xniks101x  I can see a comment but something has clearly gone wrong. Most of it is nonsensical
    1
  153.  @xniks101x  Ok. I can't speak to the specifics of this one case. You haven't made it clear if your mother is a U.K resident for example, was it that there wasn't a suitable doctor on staff, is that because of the location of hospital etc. And I am unaware of the seriousness of a detached retina. It seems if there was significant genuine threat of blindness in the next 24 hours then she would have been treated if possible. But I still don't see how this is indicative of a problem with the NHS as a whole. No system is perfect, there will be issues. But how does this one situation reflect that the system as a whole is worse than the current U.S system?
    1
  154.  @alldayrj2k_939  He is gay and he knows it, that's why he has chosen to remain celibate. He admitted it in the video
    1
  155. Why would you think that?
    1
  156. Why shouldn't they be allowed to get married in church?
    1
  157.  @norabacsi3302  Why would God think homosexuality is a sin? So if a couple are biologically unable to have children, in your eyes they shouldn't marry? How cruel
    1
  158.  @norabacsi3302  So why can't a homosexual couple receive God's blessing?
    1
  159. But he is a pastor.....
    1
  160.  @BDUFFY404  Why would you think that?
    1
  161. Really? How do you know?
    1
  162. Are you referring to a specific "sin" here?
    1
  163.  @godswarrior711  Which one is that?
    1
  164.  @godswarrior711  That's a sin? Why?
    1
  165.  @godswarrior711  But why should it be considered a sinful act?
    1
  166.  @godswarrior711  How is not natural? homosexuality occurs throughout nature. No new life can be born of it? So an infertile married couple are living in sin? Tell me, have you ever eaten shellfish, touched a football or worn polyester?
    1
  167. @Çaesar "The Entire World's calendar is based off of Jesus Christ". What on Earth does that have to do with anything?
    1
  168. @Çaesar Not even close to evidence and is one of the most absurd attempts at providing evidence I think I have heard. First, the whole BC/AD thing wasn’t used even in Europe until about 800 years after Jesus had died. Second, while most scholars agree that a historical figure of likely Jesus did exist, it’s not proven. And scholars doubt that he was born in the year 0. Most believe he was born between 6 and 4 BC, so, all the years are off. Third, the reason that most of the world uses BC and AD (or BCE and CE) has nothing to do with whether Jesus existed, but with the fact that Europe was dominant for a long while and that it makes sense to have one system internationally or else there will be chaos. (For a small example, witness the confusion around the different adaptations of the Gregorian calendar). Fourth, we use all sorts of terms - in particular for calendar things - that are based on other Gods. So, if the fact that the world uses BC and AD means Jesus existed, then the fact that we use Wednesday and Thursday means that Woden and Thor existed
    1
  169. Says who?
    1
  170.  @nicholasgee9127  The Democrats have just elected a literal Pastor as Senator....
    1
  171. Really? Why would you think that?
    1
  172. For accepting Gay marriage? Why not?
    1
  173. Every Christian thinks they have the correct interpretation of the Bible. That is why there are so many sects and denominations. The fact remains that none of them have proved their position to be correct
    1
  174.  @noahquiles5791  Then "those who let the Bible govern itself" should be able to prove to everybody that they alone have the correct method fore reading/interpretation of the Bible, right?
    1
  175. Not really. An example of an oxymoron would be "Creationist Science"
    1
  176.  @stephen1878  What were you attempting to say?
    1
  177.  @stephen1878 ?
    1
  178.  @stephen1878  I assume this is another terrible attempt at humour, but doesn't really work when the comments are 4 weeks apart Stephen....
    1
  179.  @stephen1878  And what side is that?
    1
  180.  @stephen1878  And yet the joke you just attempted to make was completely illogical
    1
  181.  @ejm821  So who decides the correct interpretation of these allegories and usages of symbolism?
    1
  182.  @ejm821  Exactly, different sects with different interpretations and viewpoints. Leaving the viewpoints of progressive Christians just as valid as any other Christian
    1
  183.  @ejm821  And who decides what makes more sense in the greater context of the Bible?
    1
  184. Well, yeah. That's how religion works
    1
  185. Haha good one
    1
  186.  @notishope  The God of the Bible? Really? If you say so. Then if God is love he supports two loving people of the same gender entering into a relationship with one another. Problem solved
    1
  187.  @notishope  How is a same-sex relationship "redefining love"?
    1
  188.  @notishope  Who says it can't?
    1
  189.  @notishope  How do you know there is God and what it is they say?
    1
  190.  @notishope  Are you familiar with Descartes' "Cogito ergo sum"? Also, why are you just answering my question with another one and deflecting?
    1
  191.  @notishope  Descartes said nothing about "let there be light". You asked how I know there's a me, I shared with you a prominent philosophical argument related to it. I am not avoiding the truth, if anything I seem to have put more effort into informing myself on philosophical and theological matters than you have
    1
  192.  @notishope  The beginning to all understanding is not God... And perhaps if you presented actual arguments instead of mere platitudes, I would take your assertion that I need to open my eyes more seriously
    1
  193.  @notishope  So you have no actual arguments then. Why do you believe all things must start with God? Why do you believe a God exists? If you don't have a solid basis for your belief you have no grounds upon which to say these things to me
    1
  194.  @notishope  So when invited to share why it is you believe in God, you can't even do that? I really have no reason to trust your claims then
    1
  195.  @notishope  So you trust the Bible to be the word of God?
    1
  196.  @notishope  So what word of god exists "apart from the Bible" exactly?
    1
  197.  @notishope  I asked you what word of God exists outside the Bible and you respond with quotes from the Bible...? Jesus has not trumped any other religion. There is just as little evidence for the existence of the Christian God aa therebis for any other deity
    1
  198.  @notishope  They didn't answer anything. You actually seem incapable of answering direct questions and instead going on long rants that actually say very little
    1
  199.  @notishope  I never said the message is foolish. I said that the manner in which you seek to spread the message is bordering on nonsensical and has failed to actually address any of the questions I asked of you
    1
  200.  @notishope  So your admitting your actual ntent is that I hear the message but never understand? What a terrible Christian you are
    1
  201. How so?
    1
  202.  @cameronbritton685  So it's just the religion brainwashing you then
    1
  203.  @cameronbritton685  And those with similar beliefs, organize into a religion and then brainwash others into following it
    1
  204.  @cameronbritton685  Not necessarily. But you asserted that there are no brainwashed Christians. That is simply not true
    1
  205.  @cameronbritton685  Only those who would take the Bible literally
    1
  206.  @cameronbritton685  Well, yes
    1
  207. Who does?
    1
  208.  @dyezmordz6390  Too late for what?
    1
  209.  @dyezmordz6390  Cast down? To hell? Doesn't sound like a very loving God
    1
  210.  @dyezmordz6390  He sacrificed his son to save us from the punishment that he would inflict on us, and we should be thankful? And how can you say that sending somebody to hell is the act of a loving God?
    1
  211. How is it a contradiction?
    1
  212. Not at all. Only disgrace here is you
    1
  213.  @sandisom23  Show me one verse of Christ condemning Homosexuality
    1
  214.  @sandisom23  Ok, so no verse from Christ? The figure CHRISTians are trying to emulate. Interesting you quote Leviticus though. Have you ever eaten pork?
    1
  215.  @sandisom23  Can't tell if you actually read my previous comment or you have just continued on a multi-comment rant....
    1
  216.  @sandisom23  Still ignoring me. Have you ever eaten pork?
    1
  217. @Nahema Yes what?
    1
  218. @Nahema Ok, but I wasn't talking to you. Are you claiming to hold the same views as the person I was addressing?
    1
  219. @Nahema So why is that that you would condemn homosexuality using Leviticus but not yourself for eating pork, also in Leviticus
    1
  220. @Nahema He "sanctified pork"? When did that happen?
    1
  221. @Nahema Sure you will....
    1
  222.  @DragonairbenderCannons  Where is the mention of pork specifically?
    1
  223.  @DragonairbenderCannons  I don't see mention of the word food there either. Seems like you are interpreting the verse so you are able to do what you want, eat pork. Something the progressive Christians are being accused of doing
    1
  224. You mean we should just dismiss the Old Testament?
    1
  225. You ever eaten shellfish or worn synthetics fabrics?
    1
  226.  @Umpa_official  Well no, there's many Bibles and holy books, many interpretations of every one of them, all claiming truths about a multitude of Gods and realities. The fact is none of them can prove they are correct, so you are unable to claim any one view you have of what is to be Christian is more correct than the view of somebody else
    1
  227.  @Umpa_official  It's completely Christians vs Christians. It's Christians who think the bible can be interpreted and those who think it can't. Both Christians, neither one able to prove they are correct and the other is not
    1
  228.  @Umpa_official  Christianity, as it is not grounded in fact, is pretty much whatever somebody wants it to be, since one believer can not prove in any way that their version of the belief is in any way "more correct" than another's
    1
  229. @Çaesar How does anybody?
    1
  230. And who are you to judge the level of their faith?
    1
  231.  @kelysleiva5888  Based on what? Who are you to determine their motivations?
    1
  232.  @kelysleiva5888  Well every Christian picks and chooses and interprets. You are in no position to judge their version of Christianity any less valid since no version has been proven to be correct
    1
  233.  @kelysleiva5888  And how are progressives acting in a manner that is not reflective of Christ?
    1
  234.  @kelysleiva5888  He is. So?
    1
  235.  @kelysleiva5888  Yep. Have you?
    1
  236.  @kelysleiva5888  God made marriage? Why would you say that?
    1
  237.  @kelysleiva5888  I am fine, thanks. Are you ok? I asked a relatively simple question
    1
  238.  @kelysleiva5888  I am asking why you would think God created marriage and set certain boundaries and limitations upon it?
    1
  239. A spirit?
    1
  240. Such as?
    1
  241.  @nicolewalker8326  Right, but the difference is in a society everybody collectively agrees to follow the laws and will change laws once they no longer work or are socially irrelevant. The way you are describing God makes him sound likena dictator who says "Do as I say or suffer". Why would you worship such a being?
    1
  242. What do you mean? There are literally liberal, progressive Christians present in this video
    1
  243.  @JHL751  Why are you concerning yourself with the Bible when there are literally examples of the two present in a video right in front of you...?
    1
  244.  @JHL751  I don't know. Are you suggesting then that there is only one, correct kind of Christian?
    1
  245.  @JHL751  I did answer your question, I said I don't know. And nice quote. So how do you explain the multitude of denominations and sects within Christianity?
    1
  246.  @JHL751  Right you shared scripture encouraging believers to be of one mind. And yet Christians are anything but. So how do we determine who is correct?
    1
  247.  @o.o7299  And how do you know what God commands?
    1
  248.  @o.o7299  Right, but how do you know that verse should be believed?
    1
  249.  @JHL751  Or they just have a different opinion on what God's word and will is. Unless you can definitively prove what God's word is and how it is to be understood, then you can't judge the interpretations of others as definitely false.
    1
  250.  @o.o7299  How have you determined it is morally correct. And just because something has a positive outcome doesn't mean the reasoning behind it is true. How do you know the Bible is intended to be taken literally, in its entirety?
    1
  251.  @o.o7299  And if the holy spirit tells one individual one thing is to be taken literally, and a different individual claims it lead them to believe it is open for interpretation?
    1
  252.  @JHL751  How do you know what is it that God said at all?
    1
  253.  @JHL751  How do you know what claims to be God's word is indeed so?
    1
  254.  @o.o7299  So if there is an ambiguous verse, two people pray on it, both claim the holy spirit said different things. How do you decide?
    1
  255.  @o.o7299  Not at all. If the leg doesn't heal then the person who claimed it couldn't was correct
    1
  256.  @o.o7299  How do you know that is indeed God's word?
    1
  257.  @o.o7299  There are no biblical prophecies so convincing that they could only be divine in nature
    1
  258.  @JHL751  I am asking to find truth and specifically trying to find how it is you determine what is true. God's word is direct , there is no hidden meaning? Ok. So you are comfortable worshipping a God who condones slavery?
    1
  259.  @o.o7299  Yes
    1
  260.  @o.o7299  That would be impressive if we had any proof that the Biblical Jesus actually existed and events unfolded as written
    1
  261.  @o.o7299  We do not. Yep, an agnostic atheist
    1
  262.  @o.o7299  I am not saying there is no evidence that the historical figure of Jesus existed. I am saying there is no proof the divine Jesus of the bible did. A gnostic atheist would be somebody who claims with certainty that there is no God. As an agnostic atheist I am not saying that it is a fact God does not exist, but rather that there has thus far been no sufficient evidence to prove he does, and therefore it can't said to be true that he does
    1
  263.  @o.o7299  I would accept any evidence that provided sufficient reason to accept the claim that a divine Jesus existed. Nope. I was raised around it but have never considered myself a follower
    1
  264.  @JHL751  But in the Bible god doesn't free people from slavery. He gives people permission to own and beat their slaves. It's abhorrent
    1
  265.  @JHL751  I have read Exodus. It permits the beating of slaves without punishment as long as the slave does not die. I see no video link
    1
  266.  @JHL751  I have read jt and understood it. What are you suggesting I have wrong? Nope. Nobody is perfect.
    1
  267.  @JHL751  Exodus 21:20-21 King James Version 20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. 21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money. Bible permits beating of slaves. I have nothing wrong here. And I have already told, there is no video link from you here
    1
  268.  @JHL751  This is my 3rd time telling you now, there is no link in this comments section. You clearly think you have posted one, but I have already told you and am telling you again, I do not see one
    1
  269.  @JHL751  For what purpose? What have I gotten wrong about the verse in Exodus? Just tell me that
    1
  270.  @JHL751  No you didn't. If you did address that verse could you perhaps copy and paste it here so I can see what I missed?
    1
  271.  @JHL751  If you posted it in the same comment as this apparent link, then I can't see it. Possibly because you posted a link, YouTube may have blocked it. I see no comment from you 50 minutes ago. There is the comment where I quoted the verse and then the next comment of yours I see simply says: "You have not read the bible entirely, watch the clip I sent you"
    1
  272. @Çaesar We have had this discussion before Caesar and you left em hanging. I showed to you exactly where God condones slavery, including the beating of them, and asked you to provide a single verse from the Bible explicitly condemning the act of slavery. You failed to do so
    1
  273. Who is "we"?
    1
  274.  @desecrator8979  You consider yourself a "real christian"? How did you come to such a conclusion?
    1
  275.  @adriana12995  Right. I believe you stated this to me previously. And when I pointed out to you that included condoning slavery you suddenly stopped replying...
    1
  276.  @adriana12995  Imagine I have founded a new country. Within this new country's laws, nowhere does it say that murder is a crime. There are however guidelines about the best manner in which to commit murder, best weapon to use, who is best to murder etc. There is nothing commanding murder or actively encouraging it. But it is clear to any reasonable person that my new nation condones and does not condone or forbid murder. The Bible is the same. There are guidelines on where to buy slaves, passing slaves on to your children, how one can acceptably beat their slaves. And there is no single passage clearly and directly condemning slavery. God is sure to condemn murder, theft, adultery and of course, the very important sin of worshiping any God other than him. But clearly doesn't see slavery as an evil deserving of a single line of condemnation. The Bible clearly condones slavery and if you believe the bible to be true and unchanging, then you should also find slavery acceptable. Do you?
    1
  277.  @adriana12995  Yes, God wanted his chosen people freed. He then gave those people instructions and guidelines on owning slaves, including separate instructions for if the slave is an Israelite. They are not simply detailing laws of the time. They are clear guidlines and edicts about how one can purchase and treat their slaves. To pretend otherwise highlights either a disingenuous attitude on your part or an ignorance of the passages in question. Where in the Bible is there a passage where God directly condemns slavery as he does with a multitude of other sins?
    1
  278. How so?
    1
  279. How are homosexual feelings sinful? What demonstrable harm is caused by two people of the same sex entering into a loving relationship?
    1
  280. @Çaesar You are suggesting the Bible is true?
    1
  281.  @BuildingApologetics  By showing that even Christians can't agree upon what it is their religion claims
    1
  282.  @BuildingApologetics  Except those claiming the text to be genuine and to be taken literally have not proven that claim either. So a progressive take on Christianity remains just as valid as anybody else's
    1
  283.  @BuildingApologetics  And after all that is done, you arrive at the conclusion that the Christian God exists?
    1
  284.  @BuildingApologetics  What evidence is there for a personal creator God?
    1
  285. How so?
    1
  286.  @rambo_4_christ7  How do you know? Have you perhaps received Education in ancient Hebrew? No they don't. It's called IVF. Plenty of couples, both heterosexual and homosexual have used it to get pregnant. It is perfectly pro-life to be homosexual. Again, many gay couples are raising children perfectly well and happily. What is "unnatural" about two consenting adults entering a loving relationship?
    1
  287.  @rambo_4_christ7  I asked you what is unnatural about it? What is wrong with it? What harm is caused by two adults entering into a loving relationship with one another?
    1
  288.  @rambo_4_christ7  It's possibly not deleted, but may have been flagged as potentially inappropriate and held for review. Not exactly a good sign for you though....
    1
  289.  @rambo_4_christ7  Or you are being censored for hate speech. Slightly worrying that you are unable to tell me what the harm is with a gay relationship without it being flagged as inappropriate
    1
  290.  @womped5645  "God is the creator of science"? What on earth is that supposed to mean?
    1
  291. You believe every word of the Bible is literally true and the word of God?
    1
  292.  @DSPAudiolab  So you believe slavery is acceptable, as the Bible does?
    1
  293.  @DSPAudiolab  The Bible allows the owning of people as property, permits the beating of them, the passing of slaves to your children and the taking of Prisoners of War into slavery. You are ok with all of that?
    1
  294.  @kurtiscooper7607  There are tons of contradictions, as early as Genesis. Like Genesis 1:25-27 and Genesis 2:7-19: And if neither answer can be tested or confirmed? Or both can?
    1
  295.  @greenergrass4060  Why?
    1
  296.  @ivanmeouch95  "There's nothing wrong with slavery"......? Wow dude. That's messed up.
    1
  297. Do you follow everything the Bible says? Accept as moral and immoral what the Bible claims?
    1
  298. I cannot imagine ever sitting down and writing a sentence like this. Please explain your thought process
    1
  299. @Çaesar And they are probably not a Real Scotsman either, right Caesar?
    1
  300. @ÇaesarIt is making reference to a well known logical fallacy that you are committing
    1
  301. @Çaesar Just google "No True Scotsman".
    1
  302. @Çaesar You stated an opinion and in doing so committed a well know logical fallacy. Not surprising
    1
  303. @Çaesar Please lay out to me then how you have factually determined that the OP was likely never a real member of their church
    1
  304. @Çaesar Bit odd you would attempt to imply I am ignorant of the subject matter when this whole conversation was started by me having to direct you to research the well known (and at this point rather cliche) logical fallacy you were committing... You haven't proven anything. Renouncing Christianity means no longer a Christian. Fine, pretty obvious. But you were arrogant enough to attempt to tell the OP that "You probably were never part of the church to begin with." So how are you going to factually show, that you have determined this perfect stranger to you, at NO point throughout their entire faith journey, was ever truly committed to their church and a believer with all their heart?
    1
  305. @Çaesar 1. I told you exactly which fallacy you were committing at the exact moment you did it, long before you started posting scriptures. Did you not look it up? Or did you perhaps not understand it? 2. I didn't lie about anything. You indicated you would return later with a justification for Biblical slavery and you never did, literally engaging me in a different conversation on another comment without resolving that discussion. 3. They never said they renounced Christianity, they said they left their Church. And that is irrelevant to the claim you have made. As I have said to you previously, the question is not whether or not they are a member of their church now. You stated "You probably were never part of the church to begin with.", which leaves me asking you yet again, how are you going to factually show, that you have determined this perfect stranger to you, at NO point throughout their entire faith journey, was ever truly committed to their church and a believer with all their heart?
    1
  306. @Çaesar 1. Right, so you clearly either haven't looked up the fallacy or didn't understand it or you would be aware of how you have committed it. Do you need me to explain it you dear? 2. If you posted something I never saw it, and as the original comment has now been deleted I am unable to go back and check. You seem to have been quite wounded by this accusation of mine. If you want me to read that comment feel free to type it out again and try to defend slavery as acceptable. 3. I do indeed. The definition you would be using doesn't alter the fact that you would still be committing a logical fallacy and that you STILL haven't provided any evidence of how you factually know that they NEVER truly believed with all of their heart. For the 3rd time now, are you able to prove that?
    1
  307. How so?
    1
  308.  @unfortunatelyaspursfan9823  Ok. So even if society accepts something if the Bible says it's wrong, it's wrong. And vice versa?
    1
  309.  @unfortunatelyaspursfan9823  So modern Christian should be ok with slavery? The Bible condones it and never condemns it
    1
  310.  @unfortunatelyaspursfan9823  That's the excuse I often hear. People were bought, they were not free to leave, and they were allowed to be beaten by whoever owned them. It was slavery.
    1
  311.  @unfortunatelyaspursfan9823  What does that have to do with anything I said? Are you actually suggesting that it's perfectly ok if you are slave during this lifetime....?
    1
  312.  @unfortunatelyaspursfan9823  I am not taking anything out of context. Everything I described is permitted in the Bible, and slavery is never condemend as bad, or forbidden. So modern Christians should be ok with it, right?
    1
  313. And what happens if two people both claim that the Holy Spirit has given them vastly different understandings of the Bible?
    1
  314.  @mummyanddaughter3732  Ok, so both people ask for the spirit of discernment and both people claim to have been given different truths. How do you know who is correct?
    1
  315.  @mummyanddaughter3732  I can't help you and that is the whole point I have been trying to tell you. There is no one individual who can say with complete certainty that they have the "true" or "correct" understanding of the Bible
    1
  316. Those people seem to believe you can be progressive and Christian. Who are you to tell them what they can believe?
    1
  317. There's 3 of them in the video buddy
    1
  318.  @carlosatreides5653  How so? Who are you to judge who is a genuine Christian or not?
    1
  319.  @carlosatreides5653  Ok, and how do you know you have the correct interpretation of that verse, that it is meant to be taken literally, that it was not only meant for that period in time etc?
    1
  320.  @carlosatreides5653  How do you know it's factual? You are arguing that a book claiming to be God's word should be followed exactly, because that same book claims it is God's word.
    1
  321.  @carlosatreides5653  Evidence such as...?
    1
  322.  @carlosatreides5653  That's not proof the Bible is true. That is just an indication of Christians attempting to retroactively apply scientific advancements and discoveries to vague Bible verses And there is no clear, verifiable eye witness testimony of Biblical events and the divine Jesus Christ?
    1
  323.  @carlosatreides5653  Ok. So if you can't prove the Bible is factually true and intended to be taken literally, then you can't claim the position of progressive Christians is any less valid than any other believer
    1
  324.  @carlosatreides5653  That was not evidence. Do you need me to explain why? I thought I had made it clear
    1
  325.  @carlosatreides5653  If you would like to, feel free
    1
  326. ​ @carlosatreides5653  You didn't give anything closely resembling evidence. Let's take your claim about the Bible somehow having divine knowledge of the importance of blood. The view of blood as the essence for life predates the Bible. The Code of Hammurabi from Mesopotamia (about 1727 B.C.E., before Leviticus) has a phrase which translates "to pour out his life-blood like water." In the Enuma Elish, blood was an essential ingredient which mankind was created from. Ugaritic and Egyptian sources also note the importance of blood. That blood is essential to life is not hard to figure out, especially for people who slaughter livestock. Blood is not the essence of life. We would not survive long without lungs, lymph, muscles, nerves, etc. either. Our bones produce blood, but bones are nowhere mentioned or credited in the equation. Some animals are alive without blood at all (jellyfish, sponges, etc.) and plants themselves are alive but do not have blood. Therefore, blood is not the essence of life. Rather, living things are all made of cells, which, when alive, collectively form a living organism. I would accept any sufficiently compelling evidence. Do you actually have any?
    1
  327.  @carlosatreides5653  "You will reject anything given because it doesn't conform to your original premise". That is not fair of you to say at all. I am not simply blindly rejecting things presented to me. I just gave you clear reasoning why an example you presented as only being possible through divine knowledge, does not hold up, did I not?
    1
  328.  @carlosatreides5653  How are they sufficiently dissimilar that my point no longer stands? And you mention nothing of my other examples, all of which predate the Bible and therefore show it is not suitable evidence for the claim you were making. Literally any evidence. I never demanded physical evidence from you. I said I would accept any sufficiently compelling evidence. That could take any form
    1
  329.  @carlosatreides5653  Where in the verse does it directly state that blood provides genetic information as well as information regarding sickness and disease? Well yes, because nothing you have said so far has been convincing. I will not specify exactly what kind of evidence I will accept, because as I have said multiple times now, I am not looking for any one specific kind of evidence. I would accept and indeed be eager to hear of any convincing evidence.
    1
  330.  @carlosatreides5653  Well yes, because you have not stated anything convincing and I have explained to you why it is not. I also gave you a chance to explain to me how it is. I gave you an opportunity in my last comment to justify your claim that my example didn't hold up, to show me where in the verse it directly states that blood provides genetic information etc. Can't help but notice you have ignored that request. I am an agnostic atheist
    1
  331.  @carlosatreides5653  Then the verse would be talking about DNA, not blood. This is you attempting to make more of the verse than there actually is. It is not an oxymoron. It is a well established position within philosophy and theology that sadly far too few people seem to know about. A gnostic atheist would state with 100% certainty that there is not God. This may be because they think the very concept is logically impossible, that science has rendered the idea of a god obsolete etc. An agnostic atheist is somebody who says that there is currently not enough evidence for anybody to claim that a God exists. That does not mean wholeheartedly that there is no God or that no evidence will ever be found. Merely that the claim cannot currently be accepted as true and therefore nobody can state as fact that a God exists. i don't necessarily want a mathematical calculation. As I am forced to repeat yet again, I will accept any genuine evidence, regardless of the form it takes, as long as it holds up to scrutiny.
    1
  332.  @carlosatreides5653  I am not at all confused by those terms, but by all means feel free to let me know how I am. I look forward to being educated on them. I have had to change the word in front each time not to be intentionally dense, but in an effort to help you understand my position as you are still unable to understand a relatively simple position after multiple explanations. I don't know how else to say this. I will accept any evidence that truly shows a God is real or the Bible is true
    1
  333.  @carlosatreides5653  Please elaborate further. And stil enthusiastically waiting to hear how I have been confused about some terms
    1
  334.  @carlosatreides5653  I have studied the Bible and I am perfectly ready and capable to discuss these matters online, having done so with believers many times with no issues. The fact that your only evidence for the existence of God is "The heavens declare the Glory of God" and when asked to expand on that you run away, shows it is you who os not ready. Once you are you can always try messaging me again
    1
  335.  @carlosatreides5653  "Bro"? If there were plenty of evidence that actually proved God's existence we wouldn't be having this discussion. It does explain your position, yes. You are suggesting that the very nature of reality itself points to the existence of a God. I am asking you to elaborate and explain why you would believe that to be the case
    1
  336.  @carlosatreides5653  Because you are claiming a god exists. If that's true, the entirety of makind will have to completely reevaluate every single thing we thought we understood about our reality. It's a huge claim to make. If you genuinely have evidence of course I would want to hear it
    1
  337.  @carlosatreides5653  You are not. But you are the person I am currently engaged in conversation with
    1
  338. If that happened it is probably because groups like the modern Satanic Temple have precepts that value human rights. Honestly agree with them a lot more than the messed up morality of the Bible
    1
  339.  @sunkyokim6052  Except every Christian picks and chooses when it comes to the Bible. Even those who claim they believe it to be literal truth ignore a lot of the nastier parts
    1
  340.  @sunkyokim6052  So how do you know who is not a false pastor?
    1
  341.  @sunkyokim6052  Why would I agree that the Old Testament is God's word? The fact that there is an oral tradition proves nothing about the truth of what was passed down. Also you do know that the synoptic Gospels were not written by those who knew Jesus but decades after his death?
    1
  342.  @sunkyokim6052  The so called prophesies of the bible are not proof that the entirety of the book is true. And the synoptic Gospels are Matthew, Mark, and Luke. I suggest you perhaps look more into who their authors were, for none of them were likely actual apostles of Christ
    1
  343.  @sunkyokim6052  The books are not named after their literal authors. Those names were given to the gospels by the church later on. Pretty much every biblical scholar agrees that the authors were unknown and written a number of decades after the apparent death of Christ. As I said, i really suggest you look into the actual authorship of the Bible
    1
  344.  @lenalove8138  Wow. You think slavery is ok? That's terrible
    1
  345. Every Christian cherry picks the Bible
    1
  346. "You cannot change God's word and his commands to suit your own ideology. " So you consider slavery to be acceptable, as the Bible does?
    1
  347.  @jesusislord1560  What Lord? Guide to what?
    1
  348. Huh....?
    1
  349.  @reynarobles4384  Why would I know the history of Planned Parenthood? What am I supposed to be looking for?
    1
  350.  @nicholasgee9127  Yeah, which is horrific. But I can't see any racial aspect to her beliefs that would justify the original poster's claim
    1
  351. How so?
    1
  352.  @GodofDisco  Sorry, I don't understand. How are porn and masturbation "sexual immorality"?
    1
  353. Says who?
    1
  354. So every word is to be taken as true and followed exactly? Because there are lot of horrible things in the Bible many Christians like to ignore
    1
  355.  @mcsquigly3342  The Bible's condoning of and failure to condemn slavery
    1
  356.  @mcsquigly3342  This is what every Christian seems to say. But to suggest that the entirety of slavery at the time was "indentured servitude" or "debt slavery" is just not honest. There are verses in the Bible stating that Hebrews should buy their slaves from the tribes around them, and encouraging the taking of prisoners of wars as slaves. It condones owning people as property. It's abhorrent.
    1
  357.  @mcsquigly3342  Leviticus 25:44 "'Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves." Deuteronomy 20:13-14 "When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves." And I really don't like that argument. Slavery is slavery, it doesn't matter how well somebody is treated, they are still considered nothing more than property. And even then you don't seem to full understand the rules you are referencing. The 7 year rule only applied to hebrew men. If you were a women or not Hebrew, you were a slave for life. And even if you were a hebrew man there ways an owner could keep you forever. If during your slavehood your master got you a wife, then when your 7 years were up you had to choose. Go a free man and leave your wife behind in slavery or stay with her forever. Also that same set of rules that you say treated slaves with dignity and respect, allowed the owners to beat their slaves as much as they like, as long as the injuries caused did not cause the slave to die within a couple of days of receiving them. Not a hebrew man, no limits on the beatings you may receive
    1
  358.  @mcsquigly3342  1. So slavery was just temporarily acceptable and morally ok? I am sorry, but I don't think owning another person as property has EVER been acceptable. Do you? 2. You say that you will address more further on, but again, every thing you mentioned here would have only applied to male Hebrew slaves. Everybody else had no such chances 3. That was a TINY portion of the actual slave trade carried out at the time and as I have already pointed out to you, the Bible tells its followers to BUY their slaves from other tribes and to take women and children prisoners of war captive as their slaves. Do you think that is morally acceptable? 4. In that same book, Exodus 21:21 states that a slave owner can beat their slave as the please, as long as the slave doesn't die, for the slave is their property. And AGAIN, that rule would only have applied to male Hebrew slaves. If you were a woman or a foreigner there were no restrictions on the beating you could receive. Do you think that is morally acceptable? 5. It doesn't matter if he had a plan to abolish it eventually. He is supposed to be a perfect moral God. And as I said in response to point 1, I don't believe owning another person as property has ever been acceptable, whether it was intended to be a temporary time in history or not. Do you? 6. You cannot attribute the abolition of slavery to God. If you want to do that, you must also acknowledge that came after a long time where he both condoned slavery and never condemned it, standing back and allowing it to happen, never saying it was wrong.
    1
  359. ​ @mcsquigly3342  1. What would I do in God's place? Not condone slavery! Condemn it, speak out on it for the evil it is, like God was clearly comfortable doing with so many other sins. It doesn't matter if it was a temporary plan or not. God stood by and condoned slavery. It's morally unacceptable. 2. Ok you didn't choose the system. Do you agree with it? Because it's abhorrent 3. They don't have any rights under the biblical laws on slavery... And I can't believe you are actually trying to make excuses for the encouraged abduction of women and children into slavery. 4. God didn't beat them, no. He just created the system that gave permission for them to be beaten. Equally as culpable. 5. So again, defending slavery as somehow necessary. Can't believe I am seeing this in this day and age.
    1
  360. By quoting what the Bible says and what they believe it means, they are showing that they agree with it. They have just told somebody that they believe he is headed to eternal torment in hell and that they agree with that decision. How is that not bashing or insulting somebody?
    1
  361. And who are you to judge who is or is not a false teacher?
    1
  362. It's still slavery. The Bible says that you can take prisoners of war as slaves, you are allowed to beat slaves as long as they don't die, and children born to slaves are automatically your property. It's just as horrific as colonial slavery
    1
  363. So you agree with absolutely every word in the Bible?
    1
  364. You seem to be slightly confused, only one of those is a religion
    1
  365.  @TopJazzCat  Really? Please explain to me how Progressivism as you call it and Christianity are both comparable as religions
    1
  366.  @TopJazzCat  Ok, so who or what is the ultimate authority in "progressivism"?
    1
  367.  @TopJazzCat  Clearly. Please enlighten me
    1
  368.  @TopJazzCat  I meant clearly not. My request was sincere. I am unaware of what you mean by "the utterances of the progressives" and would like some clarification
    1
  369.  @TopJazzCat  No I do not, and having expressed that several times now, only for you to keep asking, I am beginning to wonder if you do...
    1
  370.  @TopJazzCat  I know what progressives have to say and thus felt confident in my initial statement. I don't know what ultimate authority they are supposedly appealing to however and still don't know as instead of telling me you have decided to answer my question with another question.
    1
  371.  @TopJazzCat  Right, so you made an odd comment and are now making up excuses after finding that you are unable to elaborate on it when challenged to. Got it.
    1
  372.  @TopJazzCat  I do know about the differences between the world views. That's why it is so odd to hear somebody talking about progressives being united under a religion and appealing to an ultimate authority. I would love to hear that explained further but considering how easily you could have done that by now and how much effort you are putting into doing it, seems reasonable to conclude it is because you are unable to
    1
  373.  @TopJazzCat  And I am still saying I don't know who/what they supposedly appeal to. and you are still not sharing haha. I do not have a sense of entitlement over this. I am just finding it fascinating the lengths you are going to in order to avoid expanding on concepts that YOU raised
    1
  374.  @TopJazzCat  You keep referencing my "prejudice". If you are this hurt and offended by my saying "You seem to be slightly confused" you really should not be entering into any discussions about religion and politics on the internet haha
    1
  375. Yeah. Why?
    1
  376.  @stephenmains7370  Says who?
    1
  377.  @benborja3200  Who thinks that?
    1
  378.  @benborja3200  Not at all, they clearly don't agree with your statement
    1
  379.  @benborja3200  Exactly. Look at what they said. They only pointed out your obvious reductivism and misunderstanding. They didn't state anything about how they believe life came into being
    1
  380.  @benborja3200  It's not. As long as the reduced statement accurately reflects what the argument states
    1
  381.  @benborja3200  What are you considering "the faulty view"? And why are you calling me sir?
    1
  382.  @benborja3200  And what is the opposing viewpoint? There must be actual terms you can use to let me know what it is you are referring to? Miss?
    1
  383.  @benborja3200  Well for starters I wouldn't correct Cody. No need. And I would need you to clarify what it was you wanted to refer to as I have seen you refer to both the origins of the universe and to the origins of life. Those are separate topics with separate theories associated with each
    1
  384. Why?
    1
  385. That is true, but you recognize that there is a stark difference between somebody making a free choice to not date, have sex etc, and somebody who feels they risk eternity in hell if they do so?
    1
  386.  @kyleduddleston4123  You think context excuses every horrific thing in the Bible?
    1
  387.  @kyleduddleston4123  So the context that excuses slavery for example....?
    1
  388.  @kyleduddleston4123  That is what I always here trotted out as an excuse. Servitude to pay off debts did exist but so did slavery as most people know it. The Bible permits it, along with taking Prisoners of War as your slaves, passing slaves on to your children and the freedom to beat your slave as you please. It's horrific
    1
  389.  @kyleduddleston4123  I understand the Biblical stance on slavery completely. It is condoned and never condemned. It is abhorrent and inexcusable
    1
  390.  @kyleduddleston4123  The Bible never says slavery is bad and literally gives instructions on where your slaves should be purchased, passing them on and acceptable levels of beating them. It condones slavery and never condemns it. Seems you need to study your Bible some more
    1
  391.  @kyleduddleston4123  Oh really? Please elaborate and tell me what exactly I have gotten wrong thus far about slavery in the Bible
    1
  392. So you believe every word of the Bible is literally true?
    1
  393. How so?
    1
  394. Why wouldn't a Christian support BLM?
    1
  395. Destroying the Church? I think the church needs more progressive Christians. Otherwise the Church is going to remain stuck in the dark ages and keep seeing declining membership and a lack of relevancy
    1
  396. "I hear the progressive Christians basically saying they do not believe what the bible says in certain instances because they dont emotionally agree with it. " Do you approve of slavery? Because the Bible condones it and never condemns it
    1
  397.  @kelysleiva5888  That's sounding a lot like Pascal's Wager. Not the most convincing of arguments
    1
  398.  @redphoenix9468  I can read. I was just pointing out that I saw no need to for you to clarify that or make the assertion, and that I certainly hadn't prompted it any way. Calm down. Once you have calmed down perhaps you could edit your second comment to actually make it readable so that I can respond to it
    1
  399.  @redphoenix9468  I didn't say you were mad, I merely suggested you calm down. I am starting to realize now that perhaps English may not be your first language. Is that the case and why your comment doesn't make sense?
    1
  400.  @redphoenix9468  "the human brain can read sentences with the two liters taken out of a word". Liters in a word? "When 9/11 is your dumbs gonna be critical of ISlam not" What exactly was that supposes to mean?
    1
  401.  @redphoenix9468  I am not going off topic. I am literally trying to keep you on topic by asking you to clarify exactly what is you meant in a previously unreadable comment. Happy to continue this conversation once you are mature enough to handle it
    1
  402. Why can't God be a woman?
    1
  403. I am ok with that
    1
  404. I truly hope that God will help you overcome your prejudices, yes
    1
  405. How is he being hypocritical?
    1
  406. Because that's only one way of viewing the Bible and of viewing Christianity.And as it has not being proven to be correct, other stances and interpretations are just as valid
    1
  407. Why?
    1
  408.  @JonathanFromJefferson  True. Odd how so many Christians seem to try and pretend all that stuff isn't in the book
    1
  409.  @kaydencevaldez3733  But that doesn't matter. It doesn't change the fact that all the horrible things within it would have been considered moral at one point by God
    1
  410.  @nicholasgee9127  Really? Where does it say "Thou shalt not be progressive"?
    1
  411.  @lotus9865  Oh. So nothing stopping amynodu being a progressive Christian then
    1
  412.  @nicholasgee9127  Every Christian ignores the parts they don't like
    1
  413.  @nicholasgee9127  Completely true. It's why there's no unified Christian Church
    1
  414.  @lotus9865  No sass intended. Was just genuinely curious what that comment was supposed to achieve. Care to elaborate on it?
    1
  415. Exodus 21: 20-21 ""If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property."
    1
  416. "God would not ask someone to terminate a life he created", no he would just do it himself on a whim
    1
  417. So the teachings of Gods, commandments, what is permissible and impermissible, is as true now as it was then?
    1
  418.  @nathanwells586  But even laws that are no longer to be followed, were considered just, moral, necessary etc at the time?
    1
  419.  @nathanwells586  You don't consider God condoning slavery an abomination?
    1
  420.  @nathanwells586  No, the Bible condones and never condemns slavery. It is perfectly permissible according to the Bible
    1
  421.  @nathanwells586  So God allowed his people to practice slavery because his people were partaking in witchcraft and worshiping pagan Gods...? You also said you consider slavery an abomination. Why would you worship a God who condones it?
    1
  422.  @nathanwells586  My second question still stands. If you consider slavery immoral and and abomination, why worship a God who condones it?
    1
  423.  @nathanwells586  We're not talking about Mohammed. It'd really not an issue for you that not once in the only recorded example of his Word, God never condemned slavery?
    1
  424.  @nathanwells586  It matters entirely. It means that you are willing to just brush off slavery, one of the greatest evils mankind has committed, admitting that you have no idea why God would allow it. You are willing to accept an unspeakable evil under the blind faith that God had a reason for it. That's really worrying
    1
  425. How so?
    1
  426. @Angel Agbettor Why?
    1
  427.  @texvirgo9847  Why?
    1
  428.  @texvirgo9847  Why wouldn't you see them in heaven?
    1
  429.  @701765  Every Christian creates their own version of God to follow and places their own different importance in different parts of the Bible
    1
  430.  @nicholasgee9127  I thought you were not going to respond to me anymore because you found me to be disingenuous? I was waiting for examplea of such behavior
    1
  431.  @nicholasgee9127  Would still like an example of such disingenuous behavior so I can avoid coming across as such in future
    1
  432.  @adriana12995  How do you know those verses are meant to be taken literally?
    1
  433.  @adriana12995  Allegorical? An inclusion by man in order to ensure control of followers? There are numerous ways one could interpret every passage in the Bible and the book as a whole. Since the Bible has never been proven to be factually correct, it remains open for interpretation
    1
  434.  @adriana12995  You could still claim to be a Christian in so far as you see the figure of Christ as an inspirational one, and recognize that there are Biblical lessons you would like to apply to modern life. Not believing the Bible is the literal unchanging word of God also doesn't mean you don't believe that there is a God.
    1
  435.  @adriana12995  That is your take on Christianity, others have theirs. All equally valid, all equally un-proven
    1
  436.  @adriana12995  Morality is completely relative. It's why the Bible and those alive at the time considered slavery perfectly acceptable and moral, yet we can now look back and condemn. Well I can, you seem unable to...
    1
  437.  @adriana12995  And then permitted his people to go on and own their own slaves. Which I have already pointed out to you. Where is the verse of God saying slavery is wrong and should not be carried out. You know, as he does with murder, with theft, with adultery etc. Where is a single verse of God directly saying slavery is wrong and immoral?
    1
  438. Yes they can. Bible's pretty easy to pick apart, even by a layperson. Mostly because anybody wanting to claim it is true has the burden of proof fall upon them, and good luck proving that
    1
  439. How is being progressive putting your own desires above God?
    1
  440.  @nicholasgee9127  And how do you know what is the intended message of the scripture?
    1
  441. Is that the Canadian street preacher guy?
    1
  442.  @that1ne_guy  Why would you want him here? Isn't he the guy who never has a civil conversation and just shouts at people? Who got arrested for something recently?
    1
  443.  @that1ne_guy  Yeah, because Tanner is a very abrasive person who makes up for weakness in debate by arguing aggresively
    1
  444.  @that1ne_guy  Sorry, clearly I meant Lynn I am afraid I have seen enough to know I find him highly off putting
    1
  445. Every Christian makes their own version of Jesus. Progressive Christians are just wise enough to have theirs reflect the values of modern society and to reject and cast off some of the horrors in the Bible
    1
  446.  @danielcifuentes2603  No everybody does. Until the Bible is proven to be absolute fact and it is completely understood with no room for doubt, then everybody is simply following their own interpretation and placing their own importance on different parts of it. Even those who believe it is supposed to be taken 100% literally.
    1
  447.  @danielcifuentes2603  And how does any Christian know for sure that their interpretation or understanding of a verse is indeed correct?
    1
  448.  @oliviaokpara8877  They promoted the owning of people as property and beating them as you like. Where is the verse outright forbidden slavery for the evil it is?
    1
  449.  @lordofyouhaha  That is essentially an argument along the lines of something called Pascal's Wager. It has been show to be full of flaws in reasoning multiple times
    1
  450. So you think homosexuality is a sin?
    1
  451. Ezekiel 23:20
    1
  452.  @michellemichaud4916  So you truly believe every word of the Bible is true?
    1
  453.  @michellemichaud4916  Well no, if you believe in an omniscient, infallible God you can;t also believe in free will, the two are incompatible
    1
  454.  @sunkyokim6052  Who are you to make that claim?
    1
  455.  @sunkyokim6052  I don't know where you are getting that from. If I remember properly 선교씨, I had to teach you that that the Gospels were not actually written by the Apostles themselves
    1
  456.  @roneldell5137  I would ask anybody making grand claims to back up said claims. And I don't believe I have called anybody names.
    1
  457.  @roneldell5137  Then please don't speak about atheists in sweeping negative generalities if it doesn't even apply to all those present in this comment section
    1
  458.  @sunkyokim6052  And I pointed out to you that that is a meaningless difference as you would have no proof that the original source was genuinely from the Apostles. Unless you have proof of that?
    1
  459.  @sunkyokim6052  No, I was busy. I did not use google translate. If I was going to translate I would use Papago. I live in Korea, married to a Korean. I am not fluent but I do speak a bit. I don't believe I have mocked you at any point. Nor do I feel you have actually brought me any evidence in our limited interactions. If you do have evidence that Christianity is true I would love to hear it. If I have rejected evidence you provided previously I am sure it is for good reason. And I am commenting on this video because it is an area that interests me, and I am curios as to how it is any Christian, whether they be progressive or conservative, came to arrive at the position they hold. Claiming a God exists is not merely some tiny difference in opinion. It is stating something that would change our understanding of absolutely everything
    1
  460.  @sunkyokim6052  But I haven't even asked you to debate the existence of God. I and somebody else on this video simply asked you who you were to judge who and who is not Christian. That is incredibly relevant to this video and a direct response to a comment YOU chose to make
    1
  461.  @sunkyokim6052  I did read your comment. You stated your claim was based on scripture and then lead us off on a tangent talking about past discussions, failing to expand on the original answer. If you feel scripture gives you the basis to determine who and who is not a Christian I would be happy to hear it
    1
  462.  @sunkyokim6052  That is only the case if the Bible is both intended to be taken 100% literally with no interpretation and is in fact true. And until that is proved, the correct way to be a Christian is open for interpretation and debate with no one group able to say they are more "correct" in their Christianity than another.
    1
  463.  @sunkyokim6052  I am not telling you how Christians should behave. It's quite the opposite. I am saying that since nobody can prove definitively that their understanding of the Bible is the correct one, then nobody is in a position to tell somebody else that they are not a Christian or that their take on Christianity is incorrect.
    1
  464.  @sunkyokim6052  That is one way you could apply my thinking, yes. The other way is with the point in hand, that you are not able to tell anybody else they are not Christian
    1
  465. How so?
    1
  466. People are forced to make the Bible adapt to modern society. It is a book from around 2000 years ago. There is a bunch of stuff that is no longer relevant and stuff that is quite frankly horrific
    1
  467. @Çaesar Caesar, how curious to see you here. I am still waiting for a response to you on a previous thread where you promised "I will respond to your post with the proper context of the Bible". It hasn't come around. This seems to be a recurring thing for you, starting discussions which you never finish
    1
  468.  Joe  Ah really? If he is a troll he is a pretty terrible one. Dude has ended conversations with me several times now after the most basic of questioning
    1
  469. @Çaesar You didn't go into any depth at all. You said you would provide explanation and then gave no further comments. i wouldn't have raised it, except your response to me on this thread would lead me to raise the same issues as our previous conversation, and I saw no point in doing so when you had seemingly abandoned said conversation.
    1
  470.  @Twisterbeast  I am not picking any fight. I simply pointed out to them that they told to wait for a further comment from them on a different topic, yet they are starting a new conversation with me. I simply wanted to check if this meant I should consider the previous conversation over. Is that not a reasonable thing to ask? " Only God can make the blind see, nothing that we argue will change each other's view". I am perfectly open to having my views changed on nay number of topics. If you are saying you are not, it would seem like you are suffering from blind faith
    1
  471. Says who?
    1
  472. And who determines who is following the correct word exactly? And who it is that has the correct word?
    1
  473. Ok...
    1
  474. What about cases of rape?
    1
  475.  @natalie-qi5ft  I am aware. I was attemtping to point out to the original commenter however that they simply cannot paint everybody with the same brush
    1
  476. Who is attacking him? All the comments I have seen have been expressing concern for his well-being and sadness at the situation he has found himself in
    1
  477.  @brooklynmecham3017  How were they attacking him? They seemed perfectly polite and empathetic to me
    1
  478.  @brooklynmecham3017  They weren't trying to change his mind, but to gain greater understanding. Asking somebody if they are unhappy with that situation is perfectly reasonable. Anybody who strongly desires something reasonable that others have, but is denied it must be struggling with it. I and many others in this comment section feel sad that Angel feels forced to deny who he is
    1
  479.  @sunkyokim6052  And what if you are wrong and it is actually the Hindu Gods who are real? Or the Buddhist cycle of death hand rebirth? And I am sorry but there simply is not. And I hope you don't take this too harshly but you will forgive me for being extra skeptical of you when you say this as I had to inform you that the Gospels were not written by the Apostles themselves.
    1
  480.  @sunkyokim6052  I should bring evidence that there is no evidencd of an afterlife....? It is almost impossible to prove something doesn't exist. If you want to claim an afterlife DOES exist you would need to prove it
    1
  481.  @sunkyokim6052  Do you actually want me to find a link for you?
    1
  482.  @sunkyokim6052  Ok, I will post a link below now in a separate comment. Youtube has a tendency to hide such comments fearing they are spam so please let me know if you can see it
    1
  483.  @sunkyokim6052  Ok, so I already can not see the link I posted. Can you?
    1
  484. ​ @sunkyokim6052  Ok, well if you google history dot com and "who wrote the bible" you can see a pretty concise summary. In case you can't find it, here's the relevant quote "Beginning around 70 A.D., about four decades after Jesus’s crucifixion (according to the Bible), four anonymously written chronicles of his life emerged that would become central documents in the Christian faith. Named for Jesus’s most devoted earthly disciples, or apostles—Matthew, Mark, Luke and John—the four canonical Gospels were traditionally thought to be eyewitness accounts of Jesus’s life, death and resurrection. But for more than a century, scholars have generally agreed that the Gospels, like many of the books of the New Testament, were not actually written by the people to whom they are attributed. In fact, it seems clear that the stories that form the basis of Christianity were first communicated orally, and passed down from generation to generation, before they were collected and written down."
    1
  485.  @sunkyokim6052  So the gospels are a collection of stories heard by the authors, from a number of different sources, none of whom were actually there, and yet are still 100% correct?
    1
  486. That's what every Christian does....
    1
  487.  @f.baekha  So you are saying you would follow the teachings of the Bible exactly, and believe every word to be true?
    1
  488.  @f.baekha  Right. So Progressives just interpret the bible in a different way. They are still Christians
    1
  489.  @f.baekha  Huh? What do you mean?
    1
  490.  @f.baekha  How do you know a modern interpretation is less correct than any other?
    1
  491. He didn't say he was asexual did he? He acknowledged having sexual attraction but is forcing himself to not act upon them due to what he believes the scriptures say about the nature of that attraction
    1
  492. Let's be clear though, I don't think anybody is "pro abortion", they are "pro choice"
    1
  493. No, the two are nowhere near being comparable.
    1
  494.  @harbour08  It doesn't hold up. Label them what you will, murder causes demonstrable harm. What harm is caused by two consenting adults of the same gender entering in to a relationship?
    1
  495. Why not?
    1
  496.  @albertapodaca  "There is only one true and living God his ways never change and his word is true" So Christians should still be ok with slavery then?
    1
  497.  @albertapodaca  The Bible condones and never condemns slavery. So in the eyes of the Christian who believes the teachings of the Bible are never changing, slavery should still be morally acceptable. Do you think it is?
    1
  498.  @albertapodaca  There are literally verses talking about taking prisoners of war as slaves, when it is acceptable to beat your slave, when it is a slave should be released. Slavery is most definitely condoned
    1
  499.  @albertapodaca  The Bible was also used as justification by early colonialists for Slavery.... And that's all irrelevant. You said God's ways never change. The Bible condones slavery and never condemns it. So all those Christian abolitionists were going against the word of God, right?
    1
  500.  @albertapodaca  Nobody is talking about a metaphor of the world being a slave system. I am talking about biblical slavery. Owning another person as property and viewing them as such, beating them as you like. Of course I am stuck on this one issue, it's horrific. How could anybody trust God as amoral authority when he permits slavery. Unless you think owning another person is perfectly ok?
    1
  501.  @albertapodaca  Old and new covenant is also irrelevant. The fact remains that at one time, God thought it perfectly moral and correct to allow his people to own slaves and beat them as they liked. Slavery has never been acceptable And the fact that you just asked me if owning another person as property is evil is incredibly worrying
    1
  502.  @albertapodaca  Nope
    1
  503.  @albertapodaca  Of course I can use the term evil. I am designating it evil based upon my own moral code. I consider slavery evil and those who would support it or excuse it to be abhorrent. The concept no, the practice, often times yes. Completely different from slavery wherein the concept is evil
    1
  504.  @albertapodaca   @albert apodaca  A greater objective good and evil do not exist to me, but good an evil most certainly, based on my own moral code, as I have already said. I am really not sure how as somebody who has now said they have no problem with slavery, you can seek to lecture me about morals...
    1
  505.  @albertapodaca  So in your eyes, slavery has always been objectively wrong and immoral?
    1
  506.  @albertapodaca  That was an awful lot of words dedicated solely to completely misrepresenting my world view and making excuses for slavery
    1
  507. What sin does Curt love more than God? And I don;t see why you are singling out Brenda. Every Christian cherry picks
    1
  508. Me: So Christ’s body is the bread? Priest: yes Me: and he rose from the grave Priest: yes... Me: because of the yeast? Priest: no Me: okay, none of this makes sense
    1
  509.  @christina6799  These others?
    1
  510. The world didn't do anything to the word Christian, the faith did. The world marches on and progresses forward, if Christianity is unwilling to do the same it will fade further into irrelevance
    1
  511.  @kikamond936  Well everybody has a take on Christianity. It's completely open for interpretation
    1
  512.  @kikamond936  Right, and how do you know those verses are meant to be taken literally?
    1
  513.  @kikamond936  No, I meant why should they be taken as literally true and to be followed?
    1
  514. "Come to your sense"? I don't understand. What do you mean?
    1
  515. How so?
    1
  516. @Çaesar You're still here Caesar? What happened to our previous discussion? The post seems to have been deleted
    1
  517. @Çaesar Well the post has gone, presumably deleted by the original poster. But based on the preview in the notification I got you were actually attempting to justify slave owners beating their slaves as somehow moral and just
    1
  518. How so?
    1
  519.  @yiyithewuster  How so?
    1
  520.  @truthliberty5695  You need to look again at the Biblical stance on slavery. It's messed up
    1
  521.  @truthliberty5695  I don't know dude. I think a supposedly perfect, moral God condoning the owning of people as property is messed up
    1
  522.  @truthliberty5695  It is condoned in the Bible. There are rules on the treatment of slaves, where to purchased them, the fact that they can be passed down to your children. Slavery is condoned and never condemned. It's atrocious.
    1
  523.  The Real Jordan  It's amazing how much Truth and Liberty likes the sound of their own voice, huh?
    1
  524.  @truthliberty5695  I haven't lost anything. You haven't directly replied to my last comment pointing out you were wrong. I assume because you were too busy ranting at The Real Jordan.
    1
  525.  @truthliberty5695  No direct response to this comment "It is condoned in the Bible. There are rules on the treatment of slaves, where to purchase them, the fact that they can be passed down to your children. Slavery is condoned and never condemned. It's atrocious."
    1
  526.  @truthliberty5695  Wow, never thought I would put so much effort into defending slavery. "God isn't going to impose a standard on the entire world something the world didn't agree to." Yes he is, he demands standards of behavior throughout the Bible "Sure, it was a more rough time overall, but even a slave had some protection in Israel-- just another example of setting a better standard." Nope. The only laws relating to the treatment of a slave in the Bible applied to Hebrew men only. If you were bought from another tribe or were a prisoner of war, no protections.
    1
  527.  @truthliberty5695  So you admit God gave his people permission to own others as property. It's abhorrent, right?
    1
  528. Every Christian is picking and choosing which parts they believe and how much importance to give to each one. That's why there is no united Christian church
    1
  529. Not really. People here are required to be able to hold a civil discussion
    1
  530. How are the two situations at all comparable?
    1
  531.  @JP-dp3kt  Why would we disregard historical texts and writings that are confirmed through a variety of sources and evidence. There is no evidence for the divine claims of the Bible
    1
  532.  @JP-dp3kt  No, I would expect that if somebody were genuinely walking around and performing miracles, it would be found to have been written about in multiple sources, not just one book. I am familiar with Josephus and how often he is trotted out as somehow being proof. The writings of Josephus prove nothing of the Bible's validity. The titanic seems like such an odd example to choose, especially as we literally still have the sunken boat present as evidence. We didn't witness it floating, but only a generation ago there were still people alive who did. We have photos, we have countless records relating to its construction and launch. We have nothing even close to that in way of evidence that a divine Jesus existed. And the wager you are engaging in is called Pascal's Wager and has been shown to have a multitude of logical flaws ever since it was first conceived. Also, why are you calling me brother?
    1
  533.  @JP-dp3kt  And what would those texts be? i would like to look into them, though I hope they are not in a similar vein to Josephus. Never said that. I don't believe in a divine Christ because there is no good reason for me to do so
    1
  534.  @JP-dp3kt  Those are 3 examples , not nine. But if you would like I can explain to you how those do not stand up as evidence of the divine Christ? "all that the writers in the Bible had first hand accounts". You are not suggesting that the four Gospels for example, are actually first hand accounts, written by witnesses of Jesus are you?
    1
  535.  @JP-dp3kt  So am I to take your ignoring my offer to explain how Tacitus, Suetonius etc are not valid proof, as you no longer seeking to present them as such. The accepted time of writing of the Gospel is anywhere between 60-150 or so years after the death of Jesus. Even if they are based on what was once original eyewitness accounts they are bound to have lost something between the time of events and their eventual writing. It's not about having sufficient evidence to discount the Resurrection. That suggests you are working from the understanding that the Resurrection was obviously a true event and requires evidence to be proven false. It is the opposite. Any truth claim that is going to be made needs evidence to back it up.There is insufficient evidence for the Resurrection for any reasonable person to accept it as true historical fact. There are plenty of people who die for what they believe is true. Doesn't mean it was. In that case you must accept that any religion that has somebody die in its name must be true
    1
  536.  @JP-dp3kt  Ok, let's look at them one by one then Tacitus - States that Nero persecuted a sect called the Christians whose leader was put to death by Pontious Pilate. Never mind the fact that it says nothing about the divine nature of Jesus, accepting as a valid source at all is highly questionable. Prior to the writing of this two fires had destroyed much in the way of official documents that Tactius had to work with, so given limited concrete records available it would suggest Tacitus was repeating an urban myth whose source was likely the Christians themselves, especially since Tacitus was writing at a time when at least the three synoptic gospels are thought to already have been in circulation. There is no other historical confirmation that Nero persecuted Christians for the burning of Rome. Josephus and Pliny the Elder - who were both in Rome in 64 CE - didn't mention Christians at all, which seems unlikely if Nero had been blaming them for the fire. Seneca the Younger's lost On Superstition also didn't mention Christianity, according to Augustine in the 4th century. Furthermore, Neither Origen nor Tertullian use this passage despite referring to or citing Tacitus elsewhere.
    1
  537.  @JP-dp3kt  Suetonius, has a couple of quotes commonly used as apparent evidence for Christ. The first mentions that Claudius “banished the Jews from Rome, since they had made a commotion because of Chrestus.” "Chrestus," a common name meaning “good,” was used by both slaves and free people and occurs more than 80 times in Latin inscriptions.[3] There is nothing other than similarity in spelling to suggest that there is any relationship between Chrestus and Christ and it is unlikely that Christianity had spread as far as Rome during the reign of Claudius, or that it was large enough to have caused a revolt. The second simply states "Punishment was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition". Though there is some historical doubt about Chrisitians even being present in Rome at this point, even if there were all this passage would confirm is that Christians existed, it says nothing about the existence of a divine Christ
    1
  538.  @JP-dp3kt  And Pliny is much the same. Even if anybody is to take what he wrote about Christians as true, all it would do is confirm the presence of Christians and offers nothing even close to evidence for the a divine Christ. I don't see how you can possibly argue there is anything resembling evidence sufficient enough to believe in the existence of a divine Christ.
    1
  539.  @JP-dp3kt  That still doesn't mean they hold up though. I stated I had no reason to believe in a divine Christ and you offered those writing s as evidence.Even if you misunderstood me and were seeking to provide evidence of a historical Christ instead, those still do not stand up as strong evidence. I believe there was likely a figure of figures that inspired the cult of Christianity to begin, yes
    1
  540.  @JP-dp3kt  You mean based on the texts you provided alone or based on all historical evidence?
    1
  541.  @JP-dp3kt  At the time, in the region, it was considered a cult. Besides, what's the old saying? "Religion = Cult + Time" Then it is not a yes or no question. I cannot 100% confirm that the figure of Jesus of Nazareth did not exist. We also do not have enough evidence to conclusively say that he did. That is why, based on what we do have, I think all we can say it is likely a figure or figures, existed that inspired what we know today as Christianity.
    1
  542.  @JP-dp3kt  I spelled it that way when quoting Suetonius. Nice paraphrasing of wikipedia in your second paragraph there. I said it was likely that a figure who inspired Christianity existed, yes. That doesn't mean in any way shape or form that said individual matches the description of Jesus of Nazareth as in the Bible. Do you think it does?
    1
  543.  @JP-dp3kt  I believe they would both be referring to the same individual, but that doesn't mean that the Bible's description of said individual is therefore accurate. Are you suggesting it is?
    1
  544.  @JP-dp3kt  You may think this a childish example but please bear with me here. Imagine you find an old newspaper clipping referring to a man who saved a woman from being mugged. No other details, they just recognize that on the date mentioned a woman claims she was rescued from a mugging by a man. You then also find a book that refers to the mugging, stating that the protagonist of this book is the one who intervened, and is in fact the superhero the world has been waiting for, blessed with super strength, super speed, flight etc and he is destined to protect us from a future alien invasion. Would you therefore believe that this superhero exists and alien invasion is imminent?
    1
  545.  @JP-dp3kt  I called it a cult because as I said, at the time, to the Romans writing all of the documents you were presenting, it would appear as a cult. I have not called it as such since as you asked me not to. I have not been a "jerk" at all Why do you keep misrepresenting my position? Whether the historical figure of "Jesus" ever existed was never what i was asking you to prove, it was the divine Jesus. I have told you multiple times that I acknowledge the historical figure who inspired Christianity, known as Jesus likely existed. All I have asked you to do is explain to me how you get from that, to accepting everything that the Bible says to you is true? If you are unable to do that, then yes, I encourage you wholeheartedly to do more reading and analyze why it is you currently believe what you do, as you seem unable to put it into words right now. Also, why "sir"? Are you under the impression I'm a man?
    1
  546. So neither one is better than the other?
    1
  547.  @Rachel_au  To be fair, there is no proof that anything Christian's claim is God-breathed scripture is in fact so
    1
  548. Why not?
    1
  549. Progressive Christian = A person who acknowledges that an ancient book still has some good lessons to follow in our modern world, but isn't foolish enough to attempt to live by every rule dictated to a society 2000 years ago
    1
  550. Turning to the Holy spirit is not a means for discerning truth. It is exactly the same as your own individual feeling on things
    1
  551. And are you equally upset about anybody who breaks any of the other sins listed in Leviticus?
    1
  552. @Pastafarian Who are you to determine that?
    1
  553. @Pastafarian So you believe that you have the correct understanding of the Bible in its entirety? Fascinating. If that is the case, why are you not using said knowledge to unite Christianity's many denominations and factions?
    1
  554. And who determines who is a false teacher?
    1
  555.  @kikamond936  And how do you know progressive Christians are going against the intended message of the Bible?
    1
  556. ​ @kikamond936  Because you hear them speak you know they are going against the intended message of the Bible? So you believe you know the correct interpretation and message of the Bible? That's amazing. It would solve a lot of conflict and remove a lot of denominations if you could share that with the world
    1
  557.  @kikamond936  So you don't claim to know the truth but say people can find the truth. So how do you know progressive Christians haven't already found the truth?
    1
  558.  @kikamond936  I am not talking in circles., I am exposing the flaws in your reasoning. The fact that you think it sounds like talking in circles only further highlights said flaws.
    1
  559.  @TimfromGB  "Least racist country in the world"? Haha good one
    1
  560.  @sunkyokim6052  Ah you're still around. Did you happen to look into the authorship of the Bible as I recommended?
    1
  561.  @sunkyokim6052  I have read the Bible, yes. And it is not just my claim or suspicion. All Biblical scholars acknowledge that we have no idea who wrote the Gospels and have no reason to believe they were written by the apostles themselves. If you had followed up on what I said you would have found this
    1
  562. Why are you typing G-d and L-rd?
    1
  563. Ok....and the point you were hoping to make with that statement was what?
    1
  564.  @victorflores7973  People are not magnets....
    1
  565.  @victorflores7973  I am not. The comparison was ridiculous.
    1
  566.  @victorflores7973  It doesn't work as a metaphor either. It shows a complete ignorance of the nature of human sexuality. And I am good, thanks. Though why are you calling me "brother"?
    1
  567.  @victorflores7973  Ok. So?
    1
  568.  @victorflores7973  I'm very confused
    1
  569. Plenty of contradictions in the Bible
    1
  570.  @dallasbrat81  Again? Have we met before? And I am happy to provide contradictions if you would like me to. Just let me know
    1
  571.  @dallasbrat81  So you don't want to hear about the contradictions in the Bible?
    1
  572.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  What context is there that forgives what I just said? If you think you can somehow provide some, you can start with Exodus 21:20-21
    1
  573.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  But the verse says you can beat your slaves. You can beat them to within an inch of their life, but as long as they don't actually die, it's ok. It's horrific
    1
  574.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  It says if you beat your slaves and they don't die, you won't be punished. That is condoning the beating of slaves. And why does it matter if it's Old Testament?
    1
  575.  @ferusskywalker9167  Why does it matter if they are from the OT?
    1
  576.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Kimg James Version 20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. 21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money. New International version 20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property. It is not personal injury. It specifically mentions a master beating their slave with a rod. To try and pretend otherwise is just dishonest. And it doesn't matter if it's in the OT. Do you think it is or has ever been morally ok to own slaves and beat them?
    1
  577.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  "first of all I’m not ignoring anything " I mean, you replied to a comment that came after mine directly addressing you....
    1
  578.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I see no comment from you after mine
    1
  579.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Huh? I responded to that one. You responded to my reply. I am talking about my most recent comment, quoting Exodus from two versions of the Bible. You have not addressed it
    1
  580.  @SRHisntSilent  How does anybody know what God says?
    1
  581.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I am ignoring that aspect because it is not written anywhere in the verse. Please quote me the actual passage from within the Bible that states a slave is to be released after they have been beaten. It doesn't say anything about them being able to leave after being beaten
    1
  582.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Please quote the exact words within the Biblical texts that say a slave is to be released after having been beaten
    1
  583.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Where does it say to release them? It says if the slave has recovered after a few days, then the owner is fine, and the lost work time is punishment. So an owner can beat a slave into a coma, but if they are awake and shakily back on their feet, it's ok. It's horrific. And that is what you are trying to defend
    1
  584.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I know. That's what I said.
    1
  585.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  So we are on the same page. We both recognize that the Bible says that master can beat his slave as much as he likes, with the only limitations be that the slave can't have died after a couple of days, and that the master must recognize he will be down on slave in his workforce whilst they recover. You find this a good, moral, acceptable thing?
    1
  586.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I am not claiming you find it a good moral thing, I am asking if you do?
    1
  587.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  What things...?
    1
  588.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  You literally said two hours ago: "However, if the slave lives a few days after the beating, you are not to be punished. After all, you have already lost the services of that slave who was your property." There you have it. Death is the only restriction. Otherwise the Bible condones beating your slaves as you like
    1
  589.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I am not ignoring what you type. I had thought you were finally seeing the verse for what it said and not trying to paint it in a positive light. Guess I was wrong. Is it not hard putting all this energy into defending the biblical right to beat your slaves?
    1
  590.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Let me try boil this down to its most simplest form. Do you acknowledge, that the verses in Exodus allow a master to beat his slaves?
    1
  591.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Please answer my question. Do you acknowledge that the verses in Exodus allow a master to beat his slaves?
    1
  592.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  So you do acknowledge it was permissible. Do you think owning and beating a slave has ever been morally ok?
    1
  593. ​ @lianobodynobodynobody5083  You can try to make it sound nicer by calling it a personal injury, but why not just be open about what it was. Biblically sanctioned beating of another human because they were considered nothing more than property. I suspect the reason that you are having a hard time directly saying whether you consider it morally ok, is because you a good person who recognizes that owning and beating slaves is not acceptable. The problem is you have always been taught or held the belief that the Bible is a good book, with no errors. So you are forced to try and find any excuse possible to defend a position you find appalling. But why Lia? You need to ask yourself this. Why would a good, moral God allow slavery and permit the slave masters to beat their slaves?
    1
  594.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  And ignoring everything I said. What a telling sign. Or is it simply that you think slavery is moral?
    1
  595.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Seriously? What question of yours am I supposed to have ignored that is more important than you confirming that you don't support slavery....?
    1
  596.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Seriously? That is more important to you than defending yourself against the accusation of supporting slavery? That's just sad Lia... 1. You started to seem to finally be on the same page when you said: "losing the work time was not a punishment for the slave. The slave would have to recover (away) and in order for that to happen they wouldn’t be able to serve their owner so service was lost for the owner indicating that if you want your services to do their services then don’t beat your slave." As I pointed out to you at the time very clearly, it meant that we both recognized the Bible allowed the beating of slaves, with punishment only coming in if the slave died. 2. You have stated several times, incorrectly, that after beating a slave they are free to leave their master's service: "what I said was that when they heal after a few days they are free to go because of the slave owners misconduct" That is simply not the case and is indicated nowhere in the verses
    1
  597.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Now please answer my question that you have repeatedly ignored. Do you think owning and beating slaves is good and moral?
    1
  598.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Please now answer my question. Do you think owning and beating slaves has ever been morally ok?
    1
  599.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Does God directly say beating your slave is forbidden? No. Does he give guidelines under which one can beat their slave and suffer no direct punishment? Yes. The bible condones beating your slaves. At this point I have said this so many times I made it so clear that you must be lying to yourself about what it is the bible says. Don't want to admit it's horrible stance on slavery perhaps
    1
  600.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Of course not! Owning people as property and beating them as you please is horrific. And declaring it as such should be the easiest thing in the world. The fact that you can't is highly worrying
    1
  601.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Do you perhaps not understand what condoning means? I have never said that the Bible actively encourages people to beat their slaves, or declares it to be a pure and Godly thing. But the fact remains that there are instructions on how to correctly beat your slave, when too much of a beating has occured. That means it is biblically permissible, God was ok with it.
    1
  602.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  The verse we have been discussing this entire time. You can beat slaves as long as they don't die
    1
  603. How does anybody know what it is God has supposedly said?
    1
  604.  @hannahfaithpadinit3125  The free will argument doesn't really hold up for the majority of Christians though
    1
  605. Every Christian picks and chooses when it comes to the Bible
    1
  606.  @GarciaonlyJesus  The fact that I can't interview every Christian is kind of the point. There are countless sects, churches and denominations, all believing their interpretation of the Bible is correct. And none of them can prove they are correct and others are wrong.
    1
  607.  @GarciaonlyJesus  So you believe the Bible is to be taken completely literally?
    1
  608.  @GarciaonlyJesus  So how do we know those scholars have the correct interpretation?
    1
  609.  @GarciaonlyJesus  These people presumably got their degrees by being to successfully argue their case and back it up with evidence. So since you trust them, you must have analyzed their works and thought processes closely, right? So how did they arrive at their conclusions and how do we know they are correct?
    1
  610.  @GarciaonlyJesus  Why do you assume I haven't done my homework? Simply because I clearly don't agree with you?
    1
  611.  @GarciaonlyJesus  Yes, I am very familiar with the names you have listed and their attempts to back up their claims with evidence. They do not hold up under scrutiny
    1
  612.  @GarciaonlyJesus  "So if you see the evidence and still don't think you have the truth well maybe you don't want to see it" No, I have seen what people claim to be evidence and no see no reason why anybody would accept it as such as it has no merit
    1
  613. I don't think the church was brought up to justify a progressive mindset. It was brought up merely to point out that there are many churches out there who will not change with the times and move forward
    1
  614.  @BigEvan96  Quite often throughout the book.
    1
  615. Because in most cases people claiming to do that are being incredibly disingenuous
    1
  616.  @justuravergekpopluvinfeminist  Do you believe that those who receive an abortion are likely headed to hell for their sin? Also, your username an Eric Nam reference?
    1
  617.  @justuravergekpopluvinfeminist  But if somebody didn't repent, do you believe they are destined for hell and would you still say you love them?
    1
  618.  @justuravergekpopluvinfeminist  So you would agree with a God that they are a terrible enough person that they deserve eternity in hell, but you would also love them...?
    1
  619. You don't think it is the duty of the government to help the poor and needy in society?
    1
  620. Why?
    1
  621.  @justastrawberrymonst  Every Christian does that. There are horrible things permitted in the Bible that (hopefully) no modern Christian would support so they choose to ignore
    1
  622.  @justastrawberrymonst  Slavery springs to mind. The Bible condones it, gives instructions on the purchasing of slaves, treatment of slaves, permissible levels of beating of said slaves, and never condemns it. Do you believe slavery to be acceptable as the Bible does?
    1
  623.  @justastrawberrymonst  It condones it. As I said previously, it gives instructions on where your slaves may be purchased, allows you to beat your slaves, says you may pass ownership of your slaves to your children etc. It is not simply describing that slavery is in the world, it is giving instructions for followers of the Bible on how to engage in it. So with that being the case, do you think that slavery is acceptable? Because if you are going to embrace the entirety of the Bible word for word, you are unable to condemn it as immoral
    1
  624.  @o.o7299  How do you know the Bible is the Word of God?
    1
  625.  @ingridcantrell1981  True. Very judgemental guy considering he is responsible for all of it
    1
  626.  @BigEvan96  Who is trying to force churches?
    1
  627.  @BigEvan96  I have never heard of anybody trying to force all churches. You have proof of that?
    1
  628. "Why protest what you don't know." Because those who do believe in the Bible will often make decisions, informed by said belief that have great impact on non-believers. Objection is perfectly justified
    1
  629.  @misspikapika7972  The Bible has a verse saying "thou shalt not be progressive"?
    1
  630.  @misspikapika7972  Every Christian picks and chooses from the Bible whether that be ignoring some parts or focusing more on others. It's why there is no unified Christian church
    1
  631. I dunno. A basic google search from me found that religious LGBTQ youth are far more likely to attempt suicide than their non-religious peers
    1
  632.  @petterrong1590  I am not sure. But even you must admit it is not hard to imagine that an LGBTQ youth raised in a household that follows a religion that constantly preaches that who they are is sinful, is more likely to feel lost, helpless and maybe suicidal?
    1
  633. How do you know God's word?
    1
  634.  @joyven8591  By faith? So you dont know the Bible is God's word, you just believe it is
    1
  635. Me: So Christ’s body is the bread? Priest: yes Me: and he rose from the grave Priest: yes... Me: because of the yeast? Priest: no Me: okay, none of this makes sense
    1
  636. Well let's be clear know, it's not that Angel necessarily wants to be celibate, it's that he doesn't want to go to hell. Pretty big difference
    1
  637.  @crazando  Right, he feels pressured to choose celibacy in order to avoid Hell
    1
  638.  @crazando  How on earth is it a free and easy choice? It is completely different from a non-religious person making the choice to be celibate. Angel believes he must choose celibacy or face damnation. It's sad.
    1
  639.  @crazando  "Hollywood idea of hell"? What exactly do you believe hell to be? Please elaborate on what you have been saying
    1
  640. @Çaesar Oh Caesar. Here you are posting again, confirming what I had already expected. You have run away from yet another conversation with me after being unable to back up what you were saying. Why start these conversations if you are unable to see them through?
    1
  641. @Çaesar What am I lying about?
    1
  642. Literally every Christian adapts the Bible to suit their needs. That's why their is no one unified Christian Church
    1
  643. Exactly, even the conservative Christians in this video are picking and choosing parts of the Bible
    1
  644. There are clearly progressive Christians. There are 3 in this video
    1
  645. Says who?
    1