(October 15, 2014 at 12:50 pm)C4RM5 Wrote:

(October 15, 2014 at 12:46 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Newsflash, C4RM5: Most of us here don't really give a flying fuck what Jesus' opinion was on marriage.

As for Jesus' alleged disciple, Matthew, actually being the author of the Gospel traditionally attributed to him, please see the meaning of the phrase 'traditionally attributed'. He wrote that Gospel the same way "Moses" wrote the Torah -- i.e., he didn't, though a lot of simpletons like you haven't caught up with the past 200+ years of Biblical scholarship. Time to join the 21st Century, son.

And please answer Esquilax's question. What are believers to do with gays according to your holy book (and why do you lack such faith that you don't follow your god's command)?

Can I say FatandFaithless didn't say Matthew didn't write the Gospel book, he said Matthew didn't meet Jesus.

Carm I didnt' say shit about Matthew or the gospels or the apostles. Get your shit straight.

Sorry FatandFaithless wrong name it wasn't you it was Esquilax.

His name is Mattay you gentile

(October 15, 2014 at 12:38 pm)C4RM5 Wrote: First of all Matthew did meet Jesus he was one of his apostles.

Nope!

The text of the book never mentions the author by name, and the "according to Matthew," bit of the title was a later addition, coming sometime in the second century. The idea that the author was Matthew the disciple and not some other Matthew was added in later still by a christian bishop named Papias, and has no evidentiary support of its own. Nowhere in the text can you find the claim that these events were eyewitnessed, as they would have been if it was authored by Matthew the apostle, and current christian scholarship indicates that the gospels of both Matthew and Luke draw heavily from the earliest gospel, Mark's, which again, they would not have to do if Matthew the apostle was the writer.

Incidentally, that very same accepted christian scholarship indicates that the gospel authorship is entirely anonymous on all counts, so you have literally no grounding to suggest that any Matthew wrote the gospel, let alone the specific one you're thinking of.

Did you do any research on this at all, or is this another one of those "I don't care about the facts, this is what I believe!" kind of things?

Quote:What I was saying about my quote was that there are pretty clear standards of what a marriage is, between man and woman, if you don't see this you haven't read my quote.

The quote merely mentions marriage between a man and a woman, it doesn't endorse it specifically, nor does it disparage gay marriage. Again, if you're merely going to accept that this is against gay marriage because it isn't mentioned, then you also have to be against being single, being asexual, and being a fisherman; after all, none of those things are specifically mentioned in that passage, which is apparently all you need to decide god is against it, right?

Or are you being totally inconsistent again?

Quote:Finally the quote Jesus said was actually a quote from the old testament Genesis 22-24" For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh."

... Attributed to him by an anonymous author who never met the guy, on both counts. Yes.

A book says a thing, the author has no way to know what he's talking about, but whatever, you believe it, facts be damned!

The answer is polygamy

(October 15, 2014 at 12:53 pm)C4RM5 Wrote: Sorry FatandFaithless wrong name it wasn't you it was Esquilax.

Right. Now I'll connect the dots for you (Esquilax can correct me if I misrepresent his point): 'Matthew', the alleged author of the Gospel bearing that name, did not meet Jesus and is not to be confused with an actual flesh-and-blood disciple who may have had that name. In fact, the gospel is only traditionally attributed to the alleged disciple Matthew, presumably to give it the veneer of authority. The gospel was written decades after Jesus' death by an anonymous author with a specific agenda, who relied on (at best) third-hand testimony that had been passed around and changed who knows how many times. So the point is that Jesus' alleged views on marriage as presented are not to be confused with accurately rendered history. Got it?

Point rendered moot. Esquilax got there first.

(October 15, 2014 at 12:50 pm)DramaQueen Wrote: Should divorce be illegal?

Malta was late to legalise it which surprised me at first

Thats what I get out of that bible quote as well.

The gospels remind me of why I became a quranist

(October 14, 2014 at 7:10 pm)One Above All Wrote:

(October 14, 2014 at 12:39 pm)CristW Wrote: Yes, I was referring to Kant's argument. No, if you were born with a biological mechanism to be a particular category, concerning sexual orientation, I doubt that genetics plays a role. This is why I say, you "decide" to be gay. Nevertheless, if you skip the previous argument and determine sexuality by an "act". The "act" would be the only way someone could determine if they are gay or not.

It really does not bother me if scientists find out if someone is born gay or not. I was by-passing the argument, even though, I mentioned it by mentioning last the final "act".

There are two arguments to the conclusion - (Gay).
One argument - genetics or social environment.
One argument - flaws in religion through social legislation.

I by-passed the first argument and concentrated on the second one.

So bisexuals like myself need to have an orgy to actually be bisexuals? That's news to me. Oh well. Better get started!

---

(October 14, 2014 at 5:20 pm)CristW Wrote: What's wrong, disappointed that I love women ??? are you jealous ???

Pfft. I love women and men. Top that.

1. If you want to be Bi-sexual that's your business not mine. As for the argument, that is still a "decision". Have you slept with both men and women in a separate incident in the past? "Orgy" was never part of the conversation.

2. I am not bi-sexual! I don't care if you are bi-sexual. However, when marriage comes up who do you marry?

Quote:However, when marriage comes up who do you marry?