-Removed-How soon you conveniently forget. You and your twin/alter ego cherry-picked. But that's what you do, isn't it.
I said, "... it seems to me God was very concerned about protecting His flock from outside influences and from developing certain habits. Apparently He was also deeply concerned about protecting the bloodline."
3 things:
1. Protecting the flock from outside influences
2. Protecting the flock from developing certain habits
3. Protecting the bloodline
Forget #1 and #2, just focus like a laser (a la the reprehensible, loathsome, cherry-picking Person B) on #3 and link it to homosexuality. 12 years plus of this pitiful, dishonest bs. You'd be a perfect fit as Trump's press secretary.
@tom-wolsey saidThe topic is the religious reasons for killing homosexuals. You were talking about the religious reasons for killing homosexuals. You were asked about the religious reasons for killing homosexuals. One of the religious reasons for killing homosexuals you gave was 'protecting the bloodline'. You were asked why "protecting the bloodline' was a religious reason for killing homosexuals. And now you are upset that you are being depicted as having been talking about the religious reasons for killing homosexuals. You now insist you were not talking about the religious reason for killing homosexuals. You are now insisting that, in the middle of answering a question about the religious reasons for killing homosexuals, you were suddenly and temporarlily not talking about the religious reason for killing homosexuals. If what's happened here is that you are frustrated and irritated that you expressed yourself clumsily and wrote badly, just say so.
I never directly linked protecting the bloodline with killing homosexuals. I never claimed to believe homosexuality is genetically transferred.
1 edit
@tom-wolsey saidIf you suddenly want to talk about "protecting the bloodlines" when explaining the religious reasons for killing homosexuals, on a thread about killing homosexuals, then why not start a thread about "Protecting Bloodlines"?
How soon you conveniently forget. You and your twin/alter ego cherry-picked. But that's what you do, isn't it.
I said, "... it seems to me God was very concerned about protecting His flock from outside influences and from developing certain habits. Apparently He was also deeply concerned about protecting the bloodline."
3 things:
1. Protecting the flock from ou ...[text shortened]... y. 12 years plus of this pitiful, dishonest bs. You'd be a perfect fit as Trump's press secretary.
@tom-wolsey saidI read "the rest of what [you] said" and understood it, without any difficulty, and then I asked you a question regarding the part about "protecting the bloodline". I felt no need to ask you about the parts I had no questions about.
You focused like a laser on the part about the bloodline, and ignored the rest of what I said.
3 edits
@tom-wolsey saidNobody here is acting like "Person B" in your straw man "typical SF discussion" here Thread 185468.
Forget #1 and #2, just focus like a laser (a la the reprehensible, loathsome, cherry-picking Person B) on #3 and link it to homosexuality.
Nobody is doing anything akin to "Person B" quibbling about "a brief, anecdotal mention of a dying flower" that is "...somewhere in paragraph 6".
That's not what is happening here.
You are instead simply being asked point-blank about something you chose to say about the topic in hand: the religious reasons for killing homosexuals.
If you expressed yourself badly or only now realize the implications of what you posted, why not just say state that that is the case rather than type all this stuff about how the people taking the time to converse with you are supposedly "reprehensible, loathsome" or "immature" or "shallow" or not "intelligent enough" or not "self-aware" enough or whatever other stuff you seem to end up typing?
1 edit
@suzianne saidIt's simply this: the fictional image of the God of the Bible of Earth is a false idol and a parochial obstruction.
What would you say explains God proclaiming he was sorry for unleashing the Flood, or his softening the heart of Cyrus to release the Israelites from Babylon?
I mean, you know, since God "changes not".
But the God of the Cosmos, Who exists in bliss and emanates all and observes all, understands how this kind of thing might happen on a micro scale. Patience and kindness will improve our local situation better than categorization and antagonism.
@deepthought saidAnd this, which speaks of the New Covenant and relates it to the old.
There's some bloodthirsty stuff in Leviticus, which is the covenant Suzianne has in mind, specifically, after a rather long list of relatives whose "nakedness thou shalt not uncover" we have:[quote] 22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
29 For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be ...[text shortened]... omy was introduced in England during the Tudor era to facilitate the dissolution of the monasteries.
"But now Jesus has obtained a superior ministry, since the covenant that he mediates is also better and is enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. For he finds fault with them when he says: "Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more." In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away." -- Hebrews 8:6-13
In the Gospels, we get this:
"Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." -- Mat 22:37-40 KJV
All the Law and the Prophets.
@suzianne saidSo, you're essentially saying the Jews are to blame.
And this, which speaks of the New Covenant and relates it to the old.
"But now Jesus has obtained a superior ministry, since the covenant that he mediates is also better and is enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. For he finds fault with them when he says: "Behold, the days are c ...[text shortened]... ommandments hang all the law and the prophets." -- Mat 22:37-40 KJV
All the Law and the Prophets.
@caesar-salad saidI've heard your limited opinion from others. I was interested in another Christian's point of view. I was responding to something he said. Not interested in a canned "Cause it's all crap" reply.
It's simply this: the fictional image of the God of the Bible of Earth is a false idol and a parochial obstruction.
But the God of the Cosmos, Who exists in bliss and emanates all and observes all, understands how this kind of thing might happen on a micro scale. Patience and kindness will improve our local situation better than categorization and antagonism.