Phil Robertson

[zekko]

I thought this thread was locked. What happened?

Not comfortable with glorifying deviancy? At odds with faggotry being pushed down yours and your childs throat? See something inherently unnatural in sodomy?..There's something wrong with YOU mentally.

If you go back even just 40 or 50 years most people in the US considered homosexuality to be deviancy. It's only in recent decades that people have successfully pushed the agenda that it is to be viewed as normal.

Point is, kids are raised today to have this point of view that it is not only okay, it's great and it is to be encouraged. But if you were born in a different time you would be raised to think something quite different, and what seems obvious now would be viewed as madness and immorality back then.

 

[Bible_Belt]

People who have problems with homosexuality USUALLY have bigger problems with themselves

Just like people who have problems with religion!

 

[backbreaker]

This single issue more than any tripes me out about Christians. The "pro gay christian"

dude, god burned an entire ****ing city down, full of innocent people, just to show a lesson to the rest of the world in the bible because there were men having sex with other men, **** that's where the word Sodomy comes form (Sodom and Gomorrah)


just admit your god doesn't like gay people lol.

 

[backbreaker]

I'm black and even I know Jesus was God incarnate. If you study the bible, every single chapter in the bible has some form of prophecy or description about Jesus.

The bible is to precise to be fake. If you don't agree with the laws and commandments of the bible then I understand, but don't sit their and say its a pile of crap when you haven't studied the bible.

i'm black, my mother growing up made me read the bible cover to cover every year (She still does this), and while i won't deflame your religion, usually the people who don't believe it, are the people who actually read it. From my experience.


ou have to know enough about history to understand what was going on at the time the bible was written and why the bible was originally written in the first place. The first bible was written around the time in the bible of first / 2nd kings (I think, don't quote me on that). The people had been driven from their land and forced to live in captivity in Babylon at this time. there were NO ties to the old land and the people had no identity. You had generations of people growing up who had no clue as to what their god was or said or where they were from as a people or their history as a people and no way to connect with this.

the original bible, as in the first 5 books of the bible or so were written for this purpose. To provide "answers" to speak to the people who were living in a foreign country to know who they are, what they believed in or where supposed to believe in and how we can get back to the land where we are from. The original bible was never written with the indented purpose that it holds today. It wasn't until some years until after jesus died on the cross that the idea of spreading the word of god to non jews was even acceptable. and you can even reference the bible (Corinthians) for that. Paul was pro gentile everyone else for the most part wasn't.

now, with this in mind, there presents a problem. how do you connect with these people that are reading this group of stories? how do you give them a sense of pride, of nationality if you will. The history of the Israelite is almost certainty not as written in the bible, they most likely never actually lived in Egypt as there is not one shred of historical evidence to suggest that they ever lived in Egypt around the time that is stated besides the text in the bible.


my point being if you are fracturing something from complete scratch.. your history.. if you will. you are going to draw it up from something around you that's just human nature. if i told you to make up a completely fake story about your history the first ing you would do is think about other people's histories and draw from that.

this is what i think the bible is at least most of the old testament. tales of fabricated peoples re worded to provide a sense of self worth and history. I mean, from a purely rational standpoint, the bible in particular alot of the older stories come straight from other religions. Moses has verbatim, down from the order to kill all males to the harboring by another woman not his mother to the becoming a great king or leader of men. as Cryus The Great, ironically the ruler of Babylon at the time most likely when the first bible was written.The noah's ark tale comes straight from the the same epic of gilgamesh or at least reads extremely similar and that too, was one of the first and most famous of Babylonian literature, the place in which they were held captive in a distant land at the time of the bible being written. even the story of adam and even copies or better stated has a lot of common themes in it from ancient babyloian / summerian culture.

I do not think this applies to the new testament. the problem people look at the bible in black and white and it's really not. I think you have three groups of the bible


1. did not happen whatsoever

pretty much everything up until ..... I will say... david slaying Goliath. That actually happened. I believe pretty much all of the events leading up to this event were false or did not happen in the bible.

but the thing is, the david and Goliath story happened in the first book of Samuel and that's the 9th book in the bible. so that means you have 8 books of history that had to be accounted for. i would throw the virgin birth in here for obvious reasons.


2. things that probably did happen but were blown out of proportion

The kingdom of david and king Solomon fall into this category. some of the jesus stories probably as well in the new testament. king solomon did exist beyond a shadow of a doubt but i doubt he was as bad ass as the bible pants him out to be. King david was much more ruthless than the bible protays him to be. He was a somewhat modern day Attila the Hun in reality. I am pretty confident in saying that a man named Jesus did exist from the city of Galilee who proclaimed to be a priest and I am petty sure he was killed by the romans but i am not sure he died on the cross. neither are alot of scholars.

3. things that without a doubt did happen


the stories of peter and paul how they spread Christianity, defiantly happened beyond a reasonable doubt. pretty much everything after St John is dead accurate.


You have to understand that the bible was never supposed to be a written history or a history book it's a religious historical account of a faith of people. so i don't get people who argue that it is 100% accurate it never was intended to be such. Keep in mind the bible, at least the Torah, is one of if not the first actual BOOK ever written. It really was intended to be a written history / who we are as a people 101 / how to survive in a foreign land book rolled into one for the jewish people and was never actually at least up to that point, never supposed to be taken literally. AT least that's the way I interpret it. I understood this even as a teenager. I don't get hung up over the literal differences in the bible. I just do not believe in the christian concept of god/or better stated the western civilizations concept of god, not because i found a few things in the bible to be not historically accurate. I'm very fascinated by religion and religious history and can talking about it in a very matter of fact manner becuase of it, I just chose not to believe it.

Point is, kids are raised today to have this point of view that it is not only okay, it's great and it is to be encouraged

while i agree it's not the death sentence it was 50 years ago, i don't agree that it's encouraged

Uganda just passed an anti gay law that allows for people who are gay to be put to death.


I got a gay client who i saw his instagram the other day and he was making out with his BF. I think it's gross. But I'm still going to take his money

 

[Bible_Belt]

dude, god burned an entire ****ing city down, full of innocent people, just to show a lesson to the rest of the world in the bible because there were men having sex with other men, **** that's where the word Sodomy comes form (Sodom and Gomorrah)

just admit your god doesn't like gay people lol.

The Sodomites tried to gang rape God's two angels he sent to visit Lot. That's what the destruction of Sodom was about, not because God hates gay people.

If you want to talk historical context, let's remember that there were no condoms, birth control, or health care at the time. Given that context, the advice not to "fornicate" is not that ignorant at all. It actually shows a much greater understanding of things like STDs than was supposed to be possible at the time.

 

[backbreaker]

You're in essense sayign the same thing that I'm saying. If the bible was the word of god meant to be used as a outline of how to live life for future generations it would not make mention of things that only deal with current day issues, like how to convince people not to contract STD's and preventable bacteria such as Salmonella by not eating certain foods and saying it's the word of god.

Those references tell me that it wasn't meant for me in the first place. It was meant for those people.


What gets me about people like Robinson though and this is more geared towards zekko's post than anyone else, is that God did not like gay people. But he also says


“Judge not, that you be not judged." - Matthew 7 Verse 1

Also


"If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. - John 4 Verse 20


According to the bible, it's not MY, YOUR, Roberson, or anyone else's point or place to pass judgement upon anyone else's life choices. That's only for god to do.


These people, like Roberson are making a mockery of the christian region as all they are doing is using the viel of religion to further their own view poitns and using quotes out of the bible to prove their points. If he can quote something out of Leviticus about gay people he can quote something out of St Matthew about loving everyone else around you as you would love yourself. But that's not the convenient part of the bible.


That's why I can't take (most) Christians seriously. most are just that in name only. It's one thing to fall short of god's grace in an honest to god effort and it's an entirely different thing to say you're a christian and continue to live your ****ty live by your ****ty rules and ethics, justifying what you will by pulling out bible quotes.

Jesus in the bible who was tortured, beat half to death, made to wear a crown of thorns and carry his own cross up a hill for 2 miles, then crucified was able to forgive the men who did this act to him even though he was innnocnet, yet you have a bunch of people running around here claiming to believe in this same man as their lord and savior and they can't even forgive people who don't have the same sexual preference as they do? lol you're going to hell with the homosexual you just don't know it.

 

[( . )( . )]

As a public celebrity he should know better. I'm not talking about him in particular when I say this but I'm just tired of tv stars voicing their political or religious opinions.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-L3dTG7HYVp0/UrRbUW9k0EI/AAAAAAAAFi4/9QJQYqK5Dyo/s1600/duck1.jpg

Not a fan of homosexuality but I think Robertson's comments were decidedly anti-gay, in that he quoted specifically anti-gay Biblical verses.

He quoted the Bible. Lets not go all white 20 something libtard art student-ish. It's not called the salad bar Bible. *Paging Dalrock*

 

[( . )( . )]

he is now experiencing firsthand that most famous of all biblical verses, whatever one sows, that will he also reap.

I think you're losing it. He paraphrased the Bible, how does reaping what one sow even connect?

He made a bunch of mewling faggots and their cleverly PC indoctrinated libtard cheer squad squirm by reading scripture. End of story. What will he "reap" and more importantly wtf has he even "sown"?

Grown men should understand that society has certain minimal standards of acceptable behavior.

Grown men don't cower before the cathedral.




Edit: On my 10 post limit.

 

[( . )( . )]

Grown men don't waste their time running around quoting anti-gay biblical references.

lolz you mean grown (emasculated Western) men don't quote the "meany words" parts of the Bible for fear of upsetting the established leftoid cathedral. Because I'm sure you're not insinuating Napoleon Bonaparte, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Christopher Columbus and every other person who's dared quote the Bible was not fully grown.

Just the "icky" parts right?

 

[Vantagepoint34]

First of all to each their own. Second if there's a problem with Jenga eventually you are screwed.

 

[FairShake]

Bear in mind Fairshake here is a sh!tlib (heh pun not intended). Hence why pathologizing man's natural revulsion toward deviancy is still used as a counter argument.

Please, it's sh!tprog, not sh!tlib.

Not comfortable with glorifying deviancy? At odds with faggotry being pushed down yours and your childs throat? See something inherently unnatural in sodomy?..There's something wrong with YOU mentally, yep that's right YOU'RE CUCKOO!!.

Tits, I don't think your possible insecurity or probable homosexuality are mental problems.

 

[FairShake]

Just like people who have problems with religion!

Some do, but I think most people with an strong sense of self come around to the anti-religious, pro-spirituality side of the argument. Even those strong ones who don't believe respect those that do.

But plenty of atheists are just as bad as many Christians.

 

[( . )( . )]

I don't think you even read your own internet link because if you did you'd realize that nowhere on that page did any of those men quote the Bible, they're just mostly the reflections of people in history who believed in God. Nobody here is denying that bible thumpers have always existed and continue to exist.

He frequently referenced God and quoted the Bible; he attended Protestant church services with his wife and children, and after the deaths of two children became more intensely concerned with God's plan for mankind-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln_and_religion

Scriptural passages cited by Columbus in his book, Libro de las profecias (Book of Prophecies)[2] include the following: Isaiah 49:1, Isaiah 51:5,Isaiah 65:1 Matthew 28:19,20,Act 1:8-http://www.icr.org/article/columbus-his-creator/

The point I was trying to make is "grown men" do indeed quote the Bible. I bet it also includes the parts that seem to be sending you into a tither

Sorry to break it to you but we're not living in the seventeenth century, and the Christian Bible is no longer the central tenet of all thought like it once was.

Oh you don't say. What gave it away? Was it the social decline or the cultural Marxist SWPL's recoiling in horror over Phil Robertson quoting the Bible?

But if you feel so strongly about it then cool, go ahead and pretend you're Napoleon or Peter the Great and quote anti-gay verses from the Bible. Let us know how far that gets you.

Yeah because that's what I did, compared myself to Napoleon. Using ridiculous extremes to win an argument that's not going to well in your favour is best kept for the womenfolk I find.

Tits, I don't think your possible insecurity or probable homosexuality are mental problems.

Ha I forgot about that one: Either way there's just something wrong with.. ME BRAINZZ !!! If all else fails attempt to shutdown questioning hetero male by accusing him of being a secret homo. Sh!tlib 101. On a side note what do you libtards do when a chick questions the merits of glorifying deviancy? Considering for all intents and purposes the "closet homo" tactic is really only meant to shutdown right thinking white hetero males. What's the go there?

 

[( . )( . )]

The point is, times have changed and nobody does it anymore - not in a negative way and nobody who wants to be taken seriously anyway.

You might be surprised . I'd bet men like Phil Robertson command more presence and seriousness from other men than guys like you do. I'd also bet the numbers are growing more every day. Men and I use the term loosely who are sh!t scared of upsetting the current cultural Marxist PC agenda are a dime a dozen.

Is this how you won your argument - by arguing that grown men used to quote the bible?

No. It was more like this remember?

Grown men should understand that society has certain minimal standards of acceptable behavior.

Grown men don't cower before the cathedral

Grown men don't waste their time running around quoting anti-gay biblical references.

you mean grown (emasculated Western) men don't quote the "meany words" parts of the Bible for fear of upsetting the established leftoid cathedral?

 

[DoubleBarrel]

From what I've read, I don't really see what the big deal is with Phil's comments.

He said, "It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus."

Duh, that's because he's straight.

If a gay person said, "It seems to me that a man's anus is more than desirable than a woman's vagina," would us straight people get offended and upset?

Would we say he's being anti-heterosexual for making a comment like that?

Hell no.

If someone said, "I don't understand why people roll dried leaves up in paper, set it on fire and then suck in the smoke," as a smoker, would it offend me?

Hell no. I'd probably even agree with them.

Phil also mentioned drunks alongside homosexuals.

Why are no drunks up in arms over Phil's comments?

It just makes gay people look like wimpy, hyper-sensitive cry babies. Not sure that's in their best interest.

On another note, however, I don't agree with his religious views. That's something that confuses me.

After all, in a nutshell, what is Christianity?

The belief that a zombie whose mother was impregnated by a ghost will grant you immortality if you telepathically vow your allegiance to him, so he can rid an evil implanted in your soul because a person made from a piece of bone was tricked into eating a magic apple by a talking snake.

Being an agnostic, that's my perspective. Does that make me anti-christian, because I'm simply telling it like it is?

Does me saying I don't understand how anyone can believe that make me an advocate of "hate speech"?

 

[( . )( . )]

I know at least A & E doesn't seem to think so.

As opposed to the tens of thousands wondering wtf happened to free speech and rallying to support the man?

You do know the difference between expressing an opinion and winning an argument don't you?

Yeah sure, I also know someone who resorts to extremes by accusing me of pretending I'm Alexander the Great doesn't think of himself as doing to well. Generally speaking.

Yeah right I'd just like to see Pair Plus or Tits quote biblical passages damning homosexuality knowing their work will find out about it.

The irony is unbelievable. The mere fact you're as frightened and aware of the cathedral as you are should be the tip off for you that we need more men like this Phil Robertson, and yet you're still not putting 2 and 2 together.

If anybody at my work made biblical quotes damning homosexuality, even if I agreed with the anti-homosexual stance I would mostly likely conclude they had mental health issues.

Wait...so even if you agreed with the quote and their stance on faggotry you would conclude they were mentally unstable for daring to vocalize the thoughts you both shared? This just gets better.

you can't go around saying things like that in public anymore.

First amendment says you're wrong.

 

[speed dawg]

It is simply amazing to me how Tittyman can absolutely wipe the floor with about 4 posters at once. I mean, completely verbally destroy, internet-style. It's a talent I don't possess. But it boils down to his views are rooted in the way things ARE. His opponents' views are rooted on how they WANT it to be. In essence, they believe in control and he believes in freedom.

And that's what it all boils down to.

If I ever make it out to Australia, we're going to hang out Tittyman. Maybe we can let our sons play together, MAYBE even with GUNS wooooooo Fairshake bradd80

 

[speed dawg]

Because it's close-minded and stupid.......His beliefs are close-minded and stupid.

Why? You haven't explained why it is close minded and stupid. All you did was reiterate what you said before, saying he should be ridiculed and mocked. A monkey could already have inferred that you think he is close-minded and stupid.

People who have problems with homosexuality USUALLY have bigger problems with themselves and focus on homosexuality to hide their own sexual proclivities or their own insecurity.

I disagree. I think this is another shaming tactic. He was asked his opinion, and he gave it. He wasn't critical of gays as people, at all. He questioned their actions. This whole site is here because we question women's actions. I question muslims' actions. It's not wrong to do that.

 

[speed dawg]

just admit your god doesn't like gay people lol.

This isn't true, nimrod.

God doesn't like homosexuality. Or any other sin. But he loves all PEOPLE. A distinction idiots like you fail (or ignore) to make.

 

[betheman]

so many appear to be authorities on Gods words, words that have been written, re written, misinterpreted, snippets used to further and individuals cause or viewpoint...isnt sin just sin? therefore we are all equally guilty? troubel here is that so many people seem to get bent right put of shape over homosexuality they ar ebeing demonised. wtf is that all about?
If you look ata woman and you have thougths of having sex with ehr, arent you suppsoed to pluck your fvcking eye out? bet we all have both eyes in situ!
but them gays, them faggots, yeah we should stone them, hang them shot them...wtf???? you sound like fvcking muslim extremists

how about if your brother, uncle, son was gay? still prepared to pick up that rock?

yeah my typing is sh!t