Why Should Jesus Love Me?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#581360 Aug 30, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Your rejected customer has the right to sue your ass off... and will probably win.
You are a poster boy for Bigoted Hypocrites.
Oh really? So when you wrote:

"No one is forcing anyone to take any job in the USA"

You were just talking out of your ass?
Neb Senu

Upper Darby, PA

#581361 Aug 30, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>Here's why.
Mark Stratton John Matthew Smith (born December 6, 1956) American professor and Biblical scholar who currently holds the Skirball Chair of Bible and Ancient Near Eastern Studies in the Department of Hebrew and Judaic Studies at New York University. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_S._Smith
Smith has more credentials than I could list in two posts.
"Biblical texts do attest to Yahweh and El as different gods sanctioned by early Israel. For example, Genesis 49:24-25 presents a series of El epithets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18. This passage does not show the relative status of the two gods in early Israel, only that they could be named separately in the same poem More helpful is the text of the Septuagint and one of the Dead sea scrolls(4Q Deut) for Deuteronomy 32: 8-9, which cast Yahweh in the role of one of the divine sons, understood as fathered by El, called Elyon in the first line;
When the Most High Elyon allotted peoples for his inheritance,
When He divided up humanity,
He fixed the boundaries for peoples,
According to the number of the divine sons of El:
For Yahweh's portion is his people,
Jacob His own inheritance.
Traditional Hebrew text(MT) perhaps reflects a discomfort with this polytheistic theology of Israel. It shows in the fourth line not "sons of El" but "sons of Israel". This passage, with the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scroll reading, presents a cosmic order in which each deity received its own nation.
Israel was the nation which Yahweh received, yet El was the head of this pantheon and Yahweh only one of its members. This reading points to an old phase of Israel's religion when El held a preeminent position apart from the status of Yahweh.
Apparently, originally El was Israel's chief god, as suggested by the personal name Israel[Isra-EL]. When the cult of Yahweh became more important in the land of early Israel, the view reflected in Deuteronomy 32:8-9 served as a mode to accommodate this religious development. El as a separate god disappeared, perhaps at different rates in different regions. This process may appear to involve Yahweh incorporating El's characteristics, for Yahweh is the eventual historical "winner". Yet in the pre-monarchic period, the process may be envisioned - at least initially - in the opposite terms: Israelite highland cult sites of El assimilated the outsider, southerner Yahweh.
In comparison, Yahweh in ancient Israel and Baal at Ugarit were both outsider warrior gods who stood second in rank to El, eventually overshadowing him in power. Yahweh's development went further. He was identified with El: here the son replaced the father whose name only serves as a title for the son.
This paradigm of convergence of divine identities succeeded the older paradigm of divine succession in the ancient Middle East(for example, Ea's replacement by his son Marduk in Enuma Elish). The erasure of the father, with the transformation into the son - a requisite condition for the monotheistic identity of the son." - The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts, by Mark S. Smith
"Biblical scholars now recognize that in the pre-exilic era Asherah worship, infant sacrifice, solar veneration, and other religious practices attacked by biblical authors represented normal Israelite worship, while monotheism was a late development in the Babylonian Exile and subsequent years." - Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, in review of Smiths work.
Polytheism persisted in Judaism until 300-200 BCE, and later.
Abrahamic belief is based upon primitive polytheistic cultures melding of varying deity beliefs as they moved to monotheism. It doesn't represent a singular and unique deity in any way. The sons of deities from myth.
What a very informative post. Thank you.
It's definitely going into my favorites file.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#581362 Aug 30, 2013
What constrained God to give His Son to die for man.

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:16

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#581363 Aug 30, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
I never even commented about your boss story, so if you're calling me a hypocrite, I'm calling you a dishonest moron.
Go.
That's why I said "you guys" (which is more than one person).

And that's why you didn't answer my question.
Dr shrink

Baltimore, MD

#581364 Aug 30, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Hush, tard.
any time entering this posts
we only can see realy hush retarded psychopath(you) and few others your followers?

what a kind of life you got,
i quess your life is worse from parasite life,or white maggots seating in old stinking hamburgers
Neb Senu

Upper Darby, PA

#581365 Aug 30, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>Here's why.
Mark Stratton John Matthew Smith (born December 6, 1956) American professor and Biblical scholar who currently holds the Skirball Chair of Bible and Ancient Near Eastern Studies in the Department of Hebrew and Judaic Studies at New York University. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_S._Smith
Smith has more credentials than I could list in two posts.
"Biblical texts do attest to Yahweh and El as different gods sanctioned by early Israel. For example, Genesis 49:24-25 presents a series of El epithets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18. This passage does not show the relative status of the two gods in early Israel, only that they could be named separately in the same poem More helpful is the text of the Septuagint and one of the Dead sea scrolls(4Q Deut) for Deuteronomy 32: 8-9, which cast Yahweh in the role of one of the divine sons, understood as fathered by El, called Elyon in the first line;
When the Most High Elyon allotted peoples for his inheritance,
When He divided up humanity,
He fixed the boundaries for peoples,
According to the number of the divine sons of El:
For Yahweh's portion is his people,
Jacob His own inheritance.
Traditional Hebrew text(MT) perhaps reflects a discomfort with this polytheistic theology of Israel. It shows in the fourth line not "sons of El" but "sons of Israel". This passage, with the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scroll reading, presents a cosmic order in which each deity received its own nation.
Israel was the nation which Yahweh received, yet El was the head of this pantheon and Yahweh only one of its members. This reading points to an old phase of Israel's religion when El held a preeminent position apart from the status of Yahweh.
Apparently, originally El was Israel's chief god, as suggested by the personal name Israel[Isra-EL]. When the cult of Yahweh became more important in the land of early Israel, the view reflected in Deuteronomy 32:8-9 served as a mode to accommodate this religious development. El as a separate god disappeared, perhaps at different rates in different regions. This process may appear to involve Yahweh incorporating El's characteristics, for Yahweh is the eventual historical "winner". Yet in the pre-monarchic period, the process may be envisioned - at least initially - in the opposite terms: Israelite highland cult sites of El assimilated the outsider, southerner Yahweh.
In comparison, Yahweh in ancient Israel and Baal at Ugarit were both outsider warrior gods who stood second in rank to El, eventually overshadowing him in power. Yahweh's development went further. He was identified with El: here the son replaced the father whose name only serves as a title for the son.
This paradigm of convergence of divine identities succeeded the older paradigm of divine succession in the ancient Middle East(for example, Ea's replacement by his son Marduk in Enuma Elish). The erasure of the father, with the transformation into the son - a requisite condition for the monotheistic identity of the son." - The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts, by Mark S. Smith
"Biblical scholars now recognize that in the pre-exilic era Asherah worship, infant sacrifice, solar veneration, and other religious practices attacked by biblical authors represented normal Israelite worship, while monotheism was a late development in the Babylonian Exile and subsequent years." - Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, in review of Smiths work.
Polytheism persisted in Judaism until 300-200 BCE, and later.
Abrahamic belief is based upon primitive polytheistic cultures melding of varying deity beliefs as they moved to monotheism. It doesn't represent a singular and unique deity in any way. The sons of deities from myth.
What a very informative post.
Thank you.
This will be clicked to my favorites file

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#581366 Aug 30, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
I didn't say you did. I wrote this to Cathcer
Poor Cathcer, so misunderstood.
It wouldn't be illegal. Suggestive is not the same as pornography
And I agree it would be immoral. But then you understand where i am coming from. It doesn't matter if we agree with each other though on what is immoral. People from the KKK and NAMBLA would vehemently disagree with people that claim what they do is immoral.
Let me take this pause to say that I love that you are grouping the KKK with NAMBLA. Few things make me happier :)
The point is a contractor should have a right to decide what job they take based on moral grounds and shouldn't be forced to accept a job to do work they find immoral. Nobody needs to agree with their morals for them to have a right to exercise their own in what jobs they accept
Sorry, not as discrimination. You can choose not to serve that self-professed KKK white guy a coffee, and tell him "I don't serve your kind here," but he can subsequently take you to court for that.

Those laws protect minorities who may not be able to defend themselves. They're good laws and you're providing bizarre examples in an attempt to garner agreement. Your argument is not unlike those given during the Jim Crow era. And I know you don't support that and don't want to return to that era - so you've got to question where your reasoning takes us.
I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on this because the post was to Catcher.
Fantastic.
But he already said he would never refuse a client based on the crime or the type of person and he would never inquire as to their guilt. So even a child molester he thought was guilty wouldn't be a line for him even knowing the recidivism rates all but guarantee they will continue to molest. If he doesn't draw a line there at morality, where would he?
A defense attorney cannot draw the line, Skom! You want people to be not represented properly in front of the law because you find them repulsive? We should deny legal counsel to those the majority disagrees with???

You can't seriously be making this argument - and, if you are, ti's a damn good thing you don't make the law.
Well let's see if you are one of the people who aren't faith-based that would do the same thing. Let's go back to the original question. Its not illegal for someone to take a sexually suggestive photo involving a child if the child is fully clothed. Someone could even claim it isn't sexually suggestive even though to probably 99.99% of people they would say it is. So if you were a photographer and an independent contractor, should you be forced to take pictures that are sexually suggestive involving children? Or should you have a say in what jobs you will be commissioned to do and be able to decide for yourself if you want to accept a job?
1. That wasn't the original question.

2. The original question was about a person who discriminated against a couple for religious reasons.

3. There are no children's groups who desire photographers to take suggestive photos of them. Your analogy here doesn't hold. It's absurd in so many ways, including:

3a. all professional child photography must be agreed to by the parents
3b. any professional child photography deemed damaging to the children can have serious consequences for those who arranged it

So why do you need to make spurious comparisons to support your point?

“LOL Really?”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#581367 Aug 30, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
This is even completely insane IMO
Pharmacists may be licensed by the state but they are not run by the state
And why shouldn't a pharmacist be able to decide what medications he provides for the public at his or her own pharmacy?
Back in the day there were two really well known anti-depressants that more and more links to suicides and homicides were being made. I can't remember the names now but they were really well known at the time. The whole drug itself has been known to have links but two were particularly bad. Anyway, they were eventually pulled but way before then a lot of doctors stopped prescribing for it and some pharmacies refused to fill it. Nobody filed lawsuits trying to force them, they just went to a different pharmacy
Now here you have a case where people are still waiting on science to determine if a fetus is a person. There is so much scientific data such a separate heart beat, separate brain waves, can feel pain, etc that seems to make it clear but for the sake of argument i will say nobody will ever be able to prove it for sure probably either way. Why should the people who feel it is killing babies be forced to provide it?
This country has gotten nuts. If someone doesn't want to take your photos, go to someone will. Who the heck would want their most important night being captured by a photographer who objects to being there on moral grounds? And who would spend the time suing a person or a pharmacy or whoever to force someone to do something they are not comfortable with? Everybody just wants to keep jamming their personal morality down everyone's throat. Do people have no right to follow their own code anymore, even if it comes to something like possibly killing innocent unborn children? What kind of twisted mind would force someone to do that (who feels that is what they are being forced to do) in order for them to stay in business? My goodness, just go down to the 100s of other pharmacies on the block and get it filled
I am all for equal rights. But we have taken it so far that there are no longer individual rights
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
But we have taken it so far that there are no longer individual rights
They have individual rights. They can either stop discriminating against a class of people or they can stop being wedding photographers.

“Runner John Green disqualified”

Since: Aug 12

4 Bible Scripture on headband

#581368 Aug 30, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep. We are finding that life is everywhere.
In as much as the entire Creation "is filled with His Glory" then life on other planets will most likely exist.
You filled my head with all kinds of ideas with that post. Thanks. Wish I had the energy to write them here.
Yeah, it's possible life could exist out there... but so far in our own vast solar system there are no "concrete" signs of life? Obviously I believe in life in the spiritual dimension.

So how much longer do you have to take the treatments?

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#581369 Aug 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
The gay couple forced the photographer...
Good!

Just like the Lovings proved their case in court.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#581370 Aug 30, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Good thing my pharmacist let me buy medication.
I guess if I was gay he should let me die.
"Praise the Christ!"
I can't believe the answers we're seeing from the religious on here. I feel like I owe IANS an apology.

If they were in charge, god, all non-Christians would suffer.
Dr shrink

Baltimore, MD

#581371 Aug 30, 2013
Neb Senu wrote:
<quoted text>
What a very informative post. Thank you.
It's definitely going into my favorites file.
fart on your favorities files?

your files are worthy only to cover by full pile of cow s.....

durnaja serpskaja sabaka

“Runner John Green disqualified”

Since: Aug 12

4 Bible Scripture on headband

#581372 Aug 30, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
<quoted text>They enslaved each other mostly... also:
"The sale of European slaves by Europeans slowly ended as the Slavic and Baltic ethnic groups Christianized by the Late Middle Ages. European slaves in the Islamic World would however, continue into the Modern time period as Muslim pirates, primarily Algerians, with the support of the Ottoman Empire, raided European coasts and shipping from the 16th to the 19th centuries"
Perhaps the Mongols enslaved whites also as Ghenghis Khan in his generals went westward.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slave...
Edit: "...and his generals..."

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#581373 Aug 30, 2013
lil whispers wrote:
For what purpose did Christ come into the world.
This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation the Christ Jesus come into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.1 Timothy 1:15
Written by Paul. Paul admits to BEING a sinner, the worst in fact.
Paul must have been gay.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#581374 Aug 30, 2013
What did the prophets say Christ would be called to endure.

He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth. He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so He openeth not His mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment; and who shall declare His generation for He was cut off out of the land of the living for the transgression of My people was He stricken. Isaiah 53:7&8.
Dr shrink

Baltimore, MD

#581375 Aug 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh really? So when you wrote:
"No one is forcing anyone to take any job in the USA"
You were just talking out of your ass?
there are not jobs in USA?
In China yes? exist many american jobs,but not here?

only foodstamps,walfare,bums,slums and criminals killing each other,
left few christian churches included yours full of lies, and devil sermons

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#581376 Aug 30, 2013
Qu_innocence wrote:
<quoted text>They enslaved each other mostly... also:
"The sale of European slaves by Europeans slowly ended as the Slavic and Baltic ethnic groups Christianized by the Late Middle Ages. European slaves in the Islamic World would however, continue into the Modern time period as Muslim pirates, primarily Algerians, with the support of the Ottoman Empire, raided European coasts and shipping from the 16th to the 19th centuries"
Perhaps the Mongols enslaved whites also as Ghenghis Khan in his generals went westward.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slave...
Exactly. Slavery was only a "black" issue in the Americas. It still continues around the world.
Dr shrink

Baltimore, MD

#581377 Aug 30, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
I never even commented about your boss story, so if you're calling me a hypocrite, I'm calling you a dishonest moron.
Go.
I am calling you atheistic moron,idiot, and chicken of cockraoch brain?
so?
Go

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#581378 Aug 30, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>What are you talking about?
I never suggested withholding medication to a particular group.
The morning after pill terminates a pregnancy. It kills the fetus. There are many people who believe that is murder of an unborn child.
Why should the stare be able to force a pharmacy to carry something they believe aids in a homocide?
You wrote:
Skombolis wrote:
This is even completely insane IMO
Pharmacists may be licensed by the state but they are not run by the state
And why shouldn't a pharmacist be able to decide what medications he provides for the public at his or her own pharmacy?
A pharmacist is a medical provider, not a moral arbitrator. The pharmacist's job is to provide medicine, not to withhold it because of personal judgement on other people.

I really can't believe I need to explain this to you. Here, think:

"I know you have HIV/AIDS, but you're gay, so you can't have your medicine."

"I know you suffer from heart problems, but you're black and that's to be expected. Tough."

"So you need your morning after pill. You're a tramp, you can't have it."

Pharmacists are not our moral overlords. They don't get to dispense their morality at the till because if we allowed them to, we would be allowing personal bias in medical distribution and that is clearly unethical.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#581379 Aug 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh really? So when you wrote:
"No one is forcing anyone to take any job in the USA"
You were just talking out of your ass?
No one forced that douchenozzle to open a photography business. Once he did, he was bound by the laws of conducting business in the USA.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Who are the most racist people towards inter-ra... 12 min spotlight on truth 3
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 22 min Correct 53,129
exhibitionism (Jul '13) 40 min HornySarah 10
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 6 hr Gabriel 992,348
Is God a "Bully" sometimes? 9 hr Doctor REALITY 26
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 9 hr Phooey 693,483
Savannah Brinson James: I'm really happy 4 U 10 hr Doctor REALITY 1
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 10 hr Holy Pipek 446,005
More from around the web