A rant to end some hate... Maddox style

[Sackanaka]

Perhaps this should go in the rant area instead, but I wanted to ask any Christian INTPs out there about their opinions.
Also, I wonder if Maddox (http://maddox.xmission.com/) is an ENTP or INTP... well that's not the point. Without further ado,

http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sackanaka

It's my xanga :blush: , don't pick on me for being unl33t. Didn't wanna paste the entire entry in this forum since I hate reading long forum entries... then again, it still will be long anyway. [stop]

[gypseymothlee]

Nice rant.
I always found it funny that the part of the Bible that mentions they always refer to, is in the same section that says that wearing clothing made from two different fabrics is a sin.

[Arioch]

Hmm.. I'm pretty sure the bible says that homosexuality isn't allowed. Quite clearly too.
Both in the New and Old testement.

Now saying that Christianity is really about [insert whatever] is a whole different argument. It's not really about wether homosexuality is right or wrong anymore but rather wether what the Bible says is still valid or not.

Personally I blame Paul for why Christianity is so crappy. But thats a whole different argument altogether.

[Division56]

Hmm.. I'm pretty sure the bible says that homosexuality isn't allowed. Quite clearly too.
Both in the New and Old testement.

Now saying that Christianity is really about [insert whatever] is a whole different argument. It's not really about wether homosexuality is right or wrong anymore but rather wether what the Bible says is still valid or not.

Personally I blame Paul for why Christianity is so crappy. But thats a whole different argument altogether.


Actually, there are only two extremely vague mentions, and nothing on lesbianiam.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm



Not that I care.

*shrug*

[Almaviva]

The trouble is that all the parts in the Bible that mention homosexuality (e.g. Leviticus) also talk about a whole lot of stuff on the same page that nobody pays any attention to whatsoever.

So it's clearly a matter, even among Christians, of picking and choosing which parts of the Bible they want to throw in people's faces.

[EternalCynic]

Hee. Fantastic rant. You are among friends :cheers:.
Also, great link, Division :D *Adds to her piles and piles of bookmarks*

[Claverhouse]

[ Proudly ]

I once pointed out to Jehovah's Witnesses that hunchbacks weren't allowed in church.

Like the Greeks, very hot on imperfection the Hebrews.



Claverhouse :ph34r:




[ An' how come all these crew-cutted old pansies who disapprove of long hair cite Paul, 'A guy shouldn't have the same hair as a chick's', and at the same time represent Jesus with shoulder-length hair ? Which is correct enough, although no-one ever portrayed him until centuries after his death. And the Bible isn't big on description; or even consistency ].

[Sackanaka]

Thanks for the comments :) :cheers:

[jimkopelli]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.
Read Heinlen. Time Enough for Love.

[candela]

I thought maddox was more like an INTJ.

[Sackanaka]

He might be a J because of his obvious judging, but I still think he's a P because
1) All J's I know wouldn't even bother arguing all this stuff online; they would just verbally say it's dumb and move on.
2) His arguments... not quite sure how to put it, but they seem much more "P" style than a "J" style.
But then again I'm biased and he probably wouldn't take the test on suggestion. As for E vs I, he could probably just flip over to the other side when needed "as he constantly reminds everyone that he doesn't work on the site for a living; it's just his hobby).

[jimkopelli]

[ An' how come all these crew-cutted old pansies who disapprove of long hair cite Paul, 'A guy shouldn't have the same hair as a chick's', and at the same time represent Jesus with shoulder-length hair ? Which is correct enough, although no-one ever portrayed him until centuries after his death. And the Bible isn't big on description; or even consistency ].

It always bothered me how Jesus is depicted as looking somewhat... Swedish... when he was born in the Middle East...

[Arioch]

[ An' how come all these crew-cutted old pansies who disapprove of long hair cite Paul, 'A guy shouldn't have the same hair as a chick's', and at the same time represent Jesus with shoulder-length hair ? Which is correct enough, although no-one ever portrayed him until centuries after his death. And the Bible isn't big on description; or even consistency ].

It always bothered me how Jesus is depicted as looking somewhat... Swedish... when he was born in the Middle East...

Actually he's filipino. Didn't you know? I remember clearly that Filipino statues of Jesus (PBUH) show him as a Filipino. Then again some statues show him as a black man. Obviously he's a black Filipino Jew that by the miriacle of God got blond hair and actually only went out at night which is why he's so pale.

Isn't it obvious?

[Arioch]

The trouble is that all the parts in the Bible that mention homosexuality (e.g. Leviticus) also talk about a whole lot of stuff on the same page that nobody pays any attention to whatsoever.

So it's clearly a matter, even among Christians, of picking and choosing which parts of the Bible they want to throw in people's faces.

Hmm.. interesting note: while conservative Christians seem to find just being homosexual sinful in Islam it is only homosexual acts (such as sodomy) which are sinful.

[Almaviva]

It amuses me how someone can think that whatever is responsible for the majesty of the universe cares what I put up my butt.

Such things (like tales of UFOs and anal probes) seem to me so obviously a product of human feelings.

[heeroyuy]

Very nice rant, I would add (unless I misread and missed this) that homosexuality has been going on since before Christianity.

The Bible is a funny thing in general. I like the old testament god best, where people are instructed to rip unborn children out of their mothers, etc, for god. Frankly, if I believed in old testament god I'd stamp "Atheist" over everything I owned just to spite him.

Just my $0.02

[Sackanaka]

Indeed it has existed (homosexuality) for as long as men realized other men turned them on. Just that it wasn't called homosexuality; they didn't really have a word for it. Thus, no one really paid attention to it. Until the 1800's, homosexuality wasn't even an issue; people just did it. You make an interesting point about the Old Testament God; I took a class last semester on Pauline scripture and that god is way different from contemporary Christianity's current concept of God (which I'm learning about this semester). This is all tied into the way people choose to see things in ways that benefit their lifestyle and/or what makes them most mentally/emotionally comfortable with the mysteries of life. Context of the times and places change everything, and apparently people either aren't aware of that or are still dumb enough to claim that it's the goddamn truth stated verbatim from the Bible.
I suppose I really shouldn't give a crap and let everyone just believe what they want but.... dammit, I hate it when people hate others just because of a label that wasn't determined by the... what do you call them... the hated? the hatee? Yeah, I sound like a hypocrite, but it's different... unless some people are just born with blind hatred towards others. In which case I'd hate them anyway since they'd probably be the ones causing me or my loved ones trouble. I still rule.

[Claverhouse]

Thus, no one really paid attention to it. Until the 1800's, homosexuality wasn't even an issue; people just did it.

No, actually people were executed for it pretty steadily from ancient times onward.

Even in America. 1624 the first, which is pretty early considering they'd only just arrived.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[KoDeN]

As a Christian INTP I don't hate people who sin, I jsut hate people who think that its okay to sin.

[int]

Even if it's funny?

[heeroyuy]

As a Christian INTP I don't hate people who sin, I jsut hate people who think that its okay to sin.

I couldn't care less if someone sins or not per say, as sin is quite relative to me. My biggest thing is when people try to tell me how I should think. I have no problem with people who think I'm wrong, because I see that as a way to benefit from our difference and perhaps if they're more 'right' and convince me, change my opinion for better. I just can't stand it when a person tries to save me, or tell me that I should feel bad for something, because I don't think they have any right to, and it's very different than simply disagreeing with me and trying to set out logical arguments. If that makes the least bit of sense, I can't tell if my thoughts are comming out half way coherent or not tonight :)

This isn't all directed at you, it's directed at most of the radical christians that do this. So don't take it personally heh.

[Sackanaka]

Thus, no one really paid attention to it. Until the 1800's, homosexuality wasn't even an issue; people just did it.

No, actually people were executed for it pretty steadily from ancient times onward.

Even in America. 1624 the first, which is pretty early considering they'd only just arrived.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

Hmm, I am clearly not a master at this issue (rant/rave for me = complaint), and either my teacher told our class incorrect information, your info's incorrect, or the most likely reason: the Bible has once again confused its devout readers and have left the people hearing its various interpretations in the dusts of ambiguity. But I'll take your word for it since it seems you have looked into this with precision. Haha, I probably also misinterpreted what the teacher said to, since her "exact" words went like "It was not until the 1800's that the term homosexuality was give the meaning we know it today." Could've been 1900 too, I'm not too keen on dates. Do you know when they did start persecuting homosexuals and their actions? From what I've been repeatedly been told, it was not during the time of Jesus; at least a few decades or centuries later.
She mentioned the coming of scientific evidence and how it affected our views on homosexuality; that contemporary Christians accept that it is not a choice to be homosexual. They do indeed still prohibit homosexual acts though, which irritates me. Basically telling them, "I totally accept you being gay, just don't be gay." :banghead: (I believe it was in one of those online tests in the other thread that mentioned in the results: You don't understand why people aren't dedicated to ending racism/sexism/etc.. something like that. I'm not gay, but the issue manages to piss me off all the time.)
(If I'm wrong about more things, please let me know. Though I probably will get bored of this topic pretty soon anyway ;P

[Sackanaka]

As a Christian INTP I don't hate people who sin, I jsut hate people who think that its okay to sin.

I feel the same way sometimes, but I'll try to elaborate further on this (perhaps you'll agree? don't wanna force anything :p)
My dad gave this reasoning for why he doesn't like Christianity; that he's disgusted at people who, from his point of view, use Christianity's key theme of forgiveness for getting away with sinning.
For me, I don't like the thought that people are putting on the facade of being good and intentionally going against everything they made themselves out to be just a day ago (perhaps half a day ago). To alleviate the frustration with this thought, I try to remind myself that I probably do not understand why they do that, what they've been through, etc. Same goes for the racists and other -ists I guess.... though it doesn't really negate the fact that they still irriatate me. Push comes to shove, I rant and rave. No punches yet.

[Claverhouse]

But I'll take your word for it since it seems you have looked into this with precision. Haha, I probably also misinterpreted what the teacher said to, since her "exact" words went like "It was not until the 1800's that the term homosexuality was give the meaning we know it today." Could've been 1900 too, I'm not too keen on dates. Do you know when they did start persecuting homosexuals and their actions? From what I've been repeatedly been told, it was not during the time of Jesus; at least a few decades or centuries later.



I'm not an expert, I just knew that they have always been persecuted in most cultures: and viciously in many. Got the 1624 date immediately off the net. Christian persecution of them may not have started for a few centuries [ no doubt to the anger of the tedious St. Paul ], but then christianity didn't get into the saddle for a few centuries: they were being gruesomely persecuted themselves. ( Although I've read in a book review that forms of gay marriage were instituted in early christian communities: that's probably modern homosexual propaganda ). Prior to that both the Romans and barbarians occasionally legally killed them AFAIK; but in the other sense, the religious sin bit, you couldn't expect the ancient Israelites to pass up the chance of condemning people and executing them. It was their main pleasure in life. Virtually any people.



Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Sackanaka]

Virtually any people.
Damn humans.
hater--> :laser: <--hater hater (me)

Haha, I guess the same applies for me. Damn me :(