What if Jesus was gay?

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Status
Not open for further replies.

gopostal

Active Member
Jan 19, 2006
848
47
28
This is something that has always fascinated me too, but for the reverse. If I were an atheist I think I'd just be inclined to just ignore 'the religious' much as I am inclined to dismiss and ignore the opinions of other equally daft people. Atheists though seem to be compelled to try to destroy opposing opinions, and the debate so quickly devolves into personal attacks and mocking. The beauty though is that this is accepted openly by the true Christian. We expect the attacks and it will not sway how we feel. I welcome the abuse in the hope that one person will ask an honest question that I get to answer.

Minds far brighter than ours have openly debated these questions to a cumulative stalemate for generations. Here's a good page to download some debates to let your own decisions form: Ultimate Apologetics

In the end there's nothing new for us to add here other than what we as human beings believe. My belief just happens to be opposite to most of yours. That's fine, I respect your rights to your own way of thinking.

One caveat: some information is historically incorrect that was posted here concerning the selection of the Cannon. This is a good overview if you care to read a factual introduction: Council of Nicaea
 

Peavey

Rattus Norvegicus
Jul 17, 2001
2,935
1
38
It doesn't require the belief in Jesus to have Universal Faith. But I will say I do believe the existence of a righteous dude who had the gift of Soul Healing and didn't judge the poor, afflicted and addicted. It's just funny when full-blown capitalists like Mitt Romney say they're Christians or Mormons, yet cling to their worldly possessions like covetous J.... nevermind ;)
 

HugoMarques

☆☆☆☆☆
Dec 14, 2010
612
0
16
Portugal
This is something that has always fascinated me too, but for the reverse. If I were an atheist I think I'd just be inclined to just ignore 'the religious' much as I am inclined to dismiss and ignore the opinions of other equally daft people. Atheists though seem to be compelled to try to destroy opposing opinions, and the debate so quickly devolves into personal attacks and mocking.

Not all atheists are like that. You only seem to have that notion because you only get the shitstorm from the atheists who (in your words) want to destroy religion.

I'm an atheist and I simply don't care about religious discussions. It's IMO an unproductive and unnecessary matter that I always try to avoid.

What if Jesus was pedophile?

images







What if Jesus was a cab driver?
 
Last edited:

Jacks:Revenge

╠╣E╚╚O
Jun 18, 2006
10,065
218
63
somewhere; sometime?
he doesn't live under some delusion that he's somehow more enlightened than the rest of mankind.
and I do?
you're confused, as usual.

my only real position is that we (as humans) can't know anything.
I trust what's in my science textbooks as far as I can know that it was written by experts in their respective fields. but this knowledge only represents what we think we know so far.

it doesn't purport to be the final answer to all questions.
this is why I'm not religious and this is why I question people who are.

you seem to think that you have the final answer to life's most important questions.

so do I think I'm more enlightened than the rest of mankind?
of course not.
do I think I'm a little more enlightened than The White Dragon who readily throws his convictions upon diatribes written by ordinary men who were not experts of science? yes.
 

gopostal

Active Member
Jan 19, 2006
848
47
28
You are contradicting yourself. If
we (as humans) can't know anything
then saying
do I think I'm a little more enlightened than The White Dragon who readily throws his convictions upon diatribes written by ordinary men who were not experts of science? yes.
carries absolutely no weight at all.

Just saying.
 

Jacks:Revenge

╠╣E╚╚O
Jun 18, 2006
10,065
218
63
somewhere; sometime?
sure, technically.

obviously I don't know any more about the nature of reality than TWD.
but as a rational skeptic I'm not claiming to.

as someone who is still completely open to any possibility (assuming the evidence matches up) I can call myself readily more enlightened than someone who already has closed off their rationale and chalked it up to whatever their little book says.
 

Lizard Of Oz

Demented Avenger
Oct 25, 1998
10,593
16
38
In a cave & grooving with a Pict
www.nsa.gov
This is something that has always fascinated me too, but for the reverse. If I were an atheist I think I'd just be inclined to just ignore 'the religious' much as I am inclined to dismiss and ignore the opinions of other equally daft people. Atheists though seem to be compelled to try to destroy opposing opinions, and the debate so quickly devolves into personal attacks and mocking. The beauty though is that this is accepted openly by the true Christian. We expect the attacks and it will not sway how we feel. I welcome the abuse in the hope that one person will ask an honest question that I get to answer.

The problem with this line of thought is that 'the religious' are constantly trying to force their religion down everybody's throat. Whether they're banging on my door to sell me their fantasies, or constantly trying to inject their religion into our government, or infiltrating school boards to introduce their particular brand of religion to brainwash children. Then they attack Non-theist like myself with accusations of "trying to destroy opposing opinions" and "abusing" religious types, when in reality it's merely self defense.
 

TWD

Cute and Cuddly
Aug 2, 2000
7,445
15
38
38
Salt Lake City UT
members.lycos.co.uk
sure, technically.

obviously I don't know any more about the nature of reality than TWD.
but as a rational skeptic I'm not claiming to.

as someone who is still completely open to any possibility (assuming the evidence matches up) I can call myself readily more enlightened than someone who already has closed off their rationale and chalked it up to whatever their little book says.

You don't see the inherent contradiction in the statement you are making? You yourself are already closing yourself off to a possibility. If you truly believe that you cannot know anything then you must admit to the possibility that one of the world religions are right. By your own logic you cannot possibly know if you are more enlightened than me or not.

I can tell you one thing for certain though. Not many people are going to take you very seriously when you're running around telling everyone why you're better than them.
 

Jacks:Revenge

╠╣E╚╚O
Jun 18, 2006
10,065
218
63
somewhere; sometime?
By your own logic you cannot possibly know if you are more enlightened than me or not.
it was never really a contradiction as much as it was just tongue-in-cheek.

you're the one who introduced the phrase "more enlightened than the rest of mankind" to this discussion. not me. I certainly don't think that of myself, nor have I ever, nor will I ever. but since you said it, I'm going to use it against you now.

as long as you unapologetically subscribe to one specific religion, then I'm going to feel like I'm slightly more enlightened than thou.

you're running around telling everyone why you're better than them.
where or when have I done this?
I've never done this.

I've disagreed with you on your personal beliefs.
how does that translate to "running around" and "telling everyone" that I'm better than them?

yeah, it doesn't.
 

Jacks:Revenge

╠╣E╚╚O
Jun 18, 2006
10,065
218
63
somewhere; sometime?
Atheists though seem to be compelled to try to destroy opposing opinions
only because religious doctrines are poisonous to the human race.

there's too many of them, they're all incompatible, and they're too divisive.
they give people divine license to justify bigotry, racism, sexism, and all manner of otherwise unspeakable acts of cruelty. if we are ever going to move forward as a species and make a push for the long-haul, then we have got to get past these silly fantasies before they tear us asunder.

I will throw out baby with bathwater.
because the bathwater is toxic and the baby is dying.

in the course of our entire human history, religion has done much more harm than good. the good comes on a micro scale, sprinkled between the bad which occurs on a macro scale. holy wars, the suppression of science and medicine, the hate for homosexuals, the disdain for birth control, etc etc.

Minds far brighter than ours have openly debated these questions to a cumulative stalemate for generations.
but it's not a stalemate.
that's nonsense.

religion has been steadily losing to science and reason for hundreds of years now. religions are constantly back-tracking and trying to find ways to adopt or adjust their dogma to include such undeniable truths as the heliocentric universe and evolution.

if you think it's a stalemate then you haven't been paying attention.
statistics clearly show that (overall, in general) as the level of education rises, the level of religious belief falls.

coincidence?
 
Last edited:

Luv_Studd

Member
Aug 17, 1999
822
6
18
57
VT
Visit site
Let's be honest, religion is instilled in people usually at a young age, while you are around people who purport to know better (ie: family or parents who instill in their kids what they believe). So, religion is just brainwashing going on.

That's the "faith" people have. It's fear that if they do not believe or follow what they've been' instructed' to believe, they'll go to hell.

I've seen the bigotry in my friends that emanated from their parents. They did not have the intelligence to figure out it was wrong.
 

gopostal

Active Member
Jan 19, 2006
848
47
28
That's a sweeping generalization Studd, and quite untrue in a very large cross-section of those who believe. My father is a devout atheist: "The Bible? That's a book of lies" was a common refrain.

I took a comparative religion course to decide for myself after realizing that there was more to this thing called existence. After a reasoned consideration I felt Lutheran most closely followed the words and directions of Jesus and that is where I hang my hat. It's not easy, you are very often the butt end of what will soon follow this post, but that's part of the path.

As an adult you decide your own way. Blaming parents for adult choices is just not taking responsibility.

:Tebows:
 

Luv_Studd

Member
Aug 17, 1999
822
6
18
57
VT
Visit site
That's a sweeping generalization Studd, and quite untrue in a very large cross-section of those who believe. My father is a devout atheist: "The Bible? That's a book of lies" was a common refrain.

I took a comparative religion course to decide for myself after realizing that there was more to this thing called existence. After a reasoned consideration I felt Lutheran most closely followed the words and directions of Jesus and that is where I hang my hat. It's not easy, you are very often the butt end of what will soon follow this post, but that's part of the path.

As an adult you decide your own way. Blaming parents for adult choices is just not taking responsibility.

:Tebows:

I agree it is sweeping and generalized. I used the word 'usually', because far more often than not, religion or someone else's beliefs & prejudices are instilled in others at a young age. Typically, fear is used to keep people in line.

Near where I live, there is a 'Faith Community Church', which is flocked by a great many kids. Abnormal volumes when compared to other faiths around the area. I have not attended, but seen first hand kids coming out vocalizing their devotion to Christ. 13 year old kids publicizing their commitment on Facebook. It's incredible, really. There's a great deal of charity work too; again, all wonderful.

What bothers me, I suppose, is the wielding power of the masses to follow what is preached and it often divides those who choose not to believe. I see it on TV with evangelical churches too. Problem is, it's not limited to just charity work and helping others. It get's political and powerful and turns into an 'us vs them', such as what we've recently seen with Chik Fil A. People working the Word in their favor. So, I have a problem with 'get them while they are young and do not know better', as well as intolerance and bigotry. What is written in the Bible is words drafted many years ago by men, according to what they believed or more importantly, wanted to use to influence others. Period.
 

gopostal

Active Member
Jan 19, 2006
848
47
28
I'm going to use something you brought up to highlight the problems that the Church faces. You mention the Chik-Fil-A "fight" and for this paragraph that's what I'm going to explore.

Pause for a moment. What really happened? The owner simply said that he did not believe in gay marriage. No customers were refused service, no gays were shunned, no rights were trampled on. This man simply gave his opinion on a public forum. That's it.

It's the gay rights groups that have massed and turned this on it's ear and morphed it into a 'movement', which is their common practice. They have started a fight over someone's thoughts to try to hammer CFA into submission under the 'equal rights' banner. There is no denial of rights, this is a fabricated fight made by people with an agenda to keep their 'cause' on the front page. The vast majority of evangelical pastors also don't believe in gay marriage. Are they also going to fight to keep the various Churches out of America?

This fight is certainly about intolerance, but it's not the intolerance you think.
 

Lizard Of Oz

Demented Avenger
Oct 25, 1998
10,593
16
38
In a cave & grooving with a Pict
www.nsa.gov
Pause for a moment. What really happened? The owner simply said that he did not believe in gay marriage. No customers were refused service, no gays were shunned, no rights were trampled on. This man simply gave his opinion on a public forum. That's it.

It's the gay rights groups that have massed and turned this on it's ear and morphed it into a 'movement', which is their common practice. They have started a fight over someone's thoughts to try to hammer CFA into submission under the 'equal rights' banner. There is no denial of rights, this is a fabricated fight made by people with an agenda to keep their 'cause' on the front page. The vast majority of evangelical pastors also don't believe in gay marriage. Are they also going to fight to keep the various Churches out of America?

This fight is certainly about intolerance, but it's not the intolerance you think.

You forgot to mention that Chik-Fil-A contributes large sums of money to anti-gay groups. Groups that are actively trying to deny equal rights to people that don't fit their narrow views.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.