Am I the only one freaked out by the fact that a worldwide religion or two gets away with telling us that our basic desires which were built into our brains... are really wrongdoings, and we should apparently be ashamed for having these feelings which are undeniably part of us.
You can't hate somebody for something that's part of them naturally can you? That's like hating somebody because of their skin, their gender... their lineage... oh wait, the Bible already does those things too... crap.
@sonic8005 the bible is a book of wonders. I read this passage in genesis talking about fear and sacrificing a child out of fear. However I come to learn that the texts are not always bluntsided , this is so far what i see people drawing mistaken bridges in the bible, such as what you describe
it's not a "mistaken bridge" that the text says what it does.
Every book has at least one or two things wrong with every story when you think about it.
If you go back to the story of Lot, you get a guy who's apparently good, so God spares his family and kills the entire city (including the innocent people who did no harm to anyone) then murders Lot's wife by turning her into salt (hardly a justifiable punishment for turning around. What was this, Medusa's fire or something?)
if you read everything for face value, one misses the point. and thats not just the bible thats everything. the common mistake i see atheists make is the assertion that we beleive the bible came directly from super natural prophets and that we see no human element in it. the point iam trying to make is that belonging and listening to church is a far different realm fro truly understanding the bible and its origins.
I for one know that it isn't from a divine source.
The problem is the majority of Christians are morons who do believe it to be from divine inspiration. It isn't. I know it's history enough to tell you this.
There's nothing to be kept sacred about it at all.
It's pretty bad already and this is only some of the parts that are wrong which haven't been touched yet.
We still have an old man who's daughters make him drink so that they can have his children which is a level of incest which is never banned in the Bible.
Apparently this trinity was much more concerned with stopping homosexuals and making laws about killing them than they were concerned with incest like that.
"The Trinity" has nothing to do with what I was talking about.
The Trinity happens to be part of the same "holy book" as Leviticus which happens to contain the passage which says that homosexuals should be killed for having sex with others of the same sex.
Apparently you're in the mindset that I should just take what parts of the Bible you like as holy or sacred or something.
The Trinity is a joke man. Think about it, three people that are the same person, sending each other for stuff?
I like to counter with a few Islamic 'laws' like wearing golden jewellery.
Somehow, when you use their tactics against them, what's written in holy books isn't important any more, or at least doesn't matter for your "eternal life."
"Lust (or lechery) is a craving for sexual intercourse, sometimes to the point of assuming a self-indulgent or violent character. Lust, or a desire for the flesh of another, is considered a sin, or impure act, in the three major Abrahamic religions."
To me, and to most Christians, lust is something more than simply seeing someone you think is sexually attractive. It is fantasizing about having the person or allowing yourself to dwell on such possibilities.
Lust is a craving for sexual intercourse, "sometimes", the rest of that stuff. the first part is perfectly natural without the sometimes. Your opinion has nothing to do with the definition, particularly the definition that I am using for the video, or would you like to make an equivication.
The way Christians use the word "lust" they mean a sin, something more than just sexual attraction. An inappropriate craving that you allow to go on.
"Your opinion has nothing to ..."
The implicit implication in the video is what the Bible and Christianity means by lust, which is not at all just sexuual attraction. It isn't my opinion. If you are going to criticize the Bible for something you have to use the word the way it is obviously meant there.
as the maker of the video, I can tell you that part of the skit makes no difference. If you asked me have I ever lusted, my understanding of the definition was the first part, so would say that, if it means the second part the answer is no, i haven't. But none of that matters for the content of the video.
It is important that you understand the difference between lust and sexual attraction if you are going to make videos bashing Christianity. At least get your criticisms in sync with what Christians actually believe. This is only a 55 second video and you go from the 19 second mark to the 30+ second mark talking specifically about lust. So I don't know how you can say it doesn't matter for the content of the video if you have an incorrect understanding of the term "lust".
You may disagree, but there is no difference between lust and sexual attraction. Oh, and the point is just because you do something once, doesn't mean you can be labeled that.
I don't think Christianity describes reality. I'm saying that an assumption (axiom) of Christianity is that what I would call a normal/essential charactoristic of being human, "desires", are per se sin. So it's in some respects it's a waste of time arguing w/them. Your vid exemplifies the tactic of Ray Comfort, who is a supreme example of what I'm talking about.
i never died, so by your logic, i'm imortal
lol, thats a great way to end a discussion
483091 2 months ago
awesome logic is awesome
MrZombieRyan 6 months ago
Am I the only one freaked out by the fact that a worldwide religion or two gets away with telling us that our basic desires which were built into our brains... are really wrongdoings, and we should apparently be ashamed for having these feelings which are undeniably part of us.
You can't hate somebody for something that's part of them naturally can you? That's like hating somebody because of their skin, their gender... their lineage... oh wait, the Bible already does those things too... crap.
sonic8005 2 years ago
@sonic8005 the bible is a book of wonders. I read this passage in genesis talking about fear and sacrificing a child out of fear. However I come to learn that the texts are not always bluntsided , this is so far what i see people drawing mistaken bridges in the bible, such as what you describe
terrec 2 years ago
it's not a "mistaken bridge" that the text says what it does.
Every book has at least one or two things wrong with every story when you think about it.
If you go back to the story of Lot, you get a guy who's apparently good, so God spares his family and kills the entire city (including the innocent people who did no harm to anyone) then murders Lot's wife by turning her into salt (hardly a justifiable punishment for turning around. What was this, Medusa's fire or something?)
sonic8005 2 years ago
@sonic8005
if you read everything for face value, one misses the point. and thats not just the bible thats everything. the common mistake i see atheists make is the assertion that we beleive the bible came directly from super natural prophets and that we see no human element in it. the point iam trying to make is that belonging and listening to church is a far different realm fro truly understanding the bible and its origins.
terrec 2 years ago
I for one know that it isn't from a divine source.
The problem is the majority of Christians are morons who do believe it to be from divine inspiration. It isn't. I know it's history enough to tell you this.
There's nothing to be kept sacred about it at all.
sonic8005 2 years ago
It's pretty bad already and this is only some of the parts that are wrong which haven't been touched yet.
We still have an old man who's daughters make him drink so that they can have his children which is a level of incest which is never banned in the Bible.
Apparently this trinity was much more concerned with stopping homosexuals and making laws about killing them than they were concerned with incest like that.
sonic8005 2 years ago
@sonic8005
the trinity is a doctrine in itself and has nothing to do with homo sexuals.
terrec 2 years ago
"The Trinity" has nothing to do with what I was talking about.
The Trinity happens to be part of the same "holy book" as Leviticus which happens to contain the passage which says that homosexuals should be killed for having sex with others of the same sex.
Apparently you're in the mindset that I should just take what parts of the Bible you like as holy or sacred or something.
The Trinity is a joke man. Think about it, three people that are the same person, sending each other for stuff?
sonic8005 2 years ago
I have stolen before.
But guess what:
I was Christian when I did it and I remember I once "prayed for forgiveness".
So F**K you Ray!
Hjernespreng 2 years ago
I like to counter with a few Islamic 'laws' like wearing golden jewellery.
Somehow, when you use their tactics against them, what's written in holy books isn't important any more, or at least doesn't matter for your "eternal life."
amandarandom89 2 years ago
"By your logic, I'm immortal." I'll have to remember that one. Thanks.
BigusGeekus 2 years ago
I love the part where he says "since I didn't die, by your logic that makes me Immortal" It just shows how faulty their logic is.
TheKilgoretrout 2 years ago
Sexual attraction is natural. Lust isn't natural.
BattleshipTx 2 years ago
What's the difference?
gavinfe 2 years ago
Wikipedia describes Lust as:
"Lust (or lechery) is a craving for sexual intercourse, sometimes to the point of assuming a self-indulgent or violent character. Lust, or a desire for the flesh of another, is considered a sin, or impure act, in the three major Abrahamic religions."
To me, and to most Christians, lust is something more than simply seeing someone you think is sexually attractive. It is fantasizing about having the person or allowing yourself to dwell on such possibilities.
BattleshipTx 2 years ago
Lust is a craving for sexual intercourse, "sometimes", the rest of that stuff. the first part is perfectly natural without the sometimes. Your opinion has nothing to do with the definition, particularly the definition that I am using for the video, or would you like to make an equivication.
gavinfe 2 years ago
The way Christians use the word "lust" they mean a sin, something more than just sexual attraction. An inappropriate craving that you allow to go on.
"Your opinion has nothing to ..."
The implicit implication in the video is what the Bible and Christianity means by lust, which is not at all just sexuual attraction. It isn't my opinion. If you are going to criticize the Bible for something you have to use the word the way it is obviously meant there.
BattleshipTx 2 years ago
as the maker of the video, I can tell you that part of the skit makes no difference. If you asked me have I ever lusted, my understanding of the definition was the first part, so would say that, if it means the second part the answer is no, i haven't. But none of that matters for the content of the video.
gavinfe 2 years ago
It is important that you understand the difference between lust and sexual attraction if you are going to make videos bashing Christianity. At least get your criticisms in sync with what Christians actually believe. This is only a 55 second video and you go from the 19 second mark to the 30+ second mark talking specifically about lust. So I don't know how you can say it doesn't matter for the content of the video if you have an incorrect understanding of the term "lust".
BattleshipTx 2 years ago
You may disagree, but there is no difference between lust and sexual attraction. Oh, and the point is just because you do something once, doesn't mean you can be labeled that.
gavinfe 2 years ago
why not?
NegativeNick 2 years ago
What's the difference?
WatanukiProductions 2 years ago
Heh ★★★★★
Katalyzt 2 years ago
Christianity starts w/the assumption that being human, one of the basics aspects of which is "desire", is per se "sin".
owheydusoapsk 2 years ago
you haven't proven to me christianity is real, so your comments on "sin" are unimportant to me.
gavinfe 2 years ago
I don't think Christianity describes reality. I'm saying that an assumption (axiom) of Christianity is that what I would call a normal/essential charactoristic of being human, "desires", are per se sin. So it's in some respects it's a waste of time arguing w/them. Your vid exemplifies the tactic of Ray Comfort, who is a supreme example of what I'm talking about.
owheydusoapsk 2 years ago
thanks, thats what I was going for.
gavinfe 2 years ago