[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Makavali wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
If you’ve got the credentials, you can go look at the originals yourself. Buy some plane tickets and have a blast.
I like how you escaped that argument.
Uh, I was serious. If you want to go look at the originals, they’re in museums. You’re not going to believe anything i tell you.
Edit: Here:
You can try reading that if you want.
Which books described therein were written by one of 11 apostles?[/quote]
Why don’t you buy the book and find out?
BTW, if we’re going to get into this, perhaps we should discuss the Uthmanic Recension and transmission of the Qur’an as well, just for parity’s sake.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Makavali wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
If you’ve got the credentials, you can go look at the originals yourself. Buy some plane tickets and have a blast.
I like how you escaped that argument.
Uh, I was serious. If you want to go look at the originals, they’re in museums. You’re not going to believe anything i tell you.
Edit: Here:
You can try reading that if you want.
Which books described therein were written by one of 11 apostles?
Why don’t you buy the book and find out?
BTW, if we’re going to get into this, perhaps we should discuss the Uthmanic Recension and transmission of the Qur’an as well, just for parity’s sake.
[/quote]
Find out that none of the gospel was written by the 11 disciples (except maybe the “gospel of Judas”, if it is authentic)? Find out that a huge part of the gospel was written by a guy who didn’t even know Jesus? Yeah, I’ll spend the money on a nice meal, thanks.
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Makavali wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
If you’ve got the credentials, you can go look at the originals yourself. Buy some plane tickets and have a blast.
I like how you escaped that argument.
Uh, I was serious. If you want to go look at the originals, they’re in museums. You’re not going to believe anything i tell you.
Edit: Here:
You can try reading that if you want.
Which books described therein were written by one of 11 apostles?
Why don’t you buy the book and find out?
BTW, if we’re going to get into this, perhaps we should discuss the Uthmanic Recension and transmission of the Qur’an as well, just for parity’s sake.
Find out that none of the gospel was written by the 11 disciples (except maybe the “gospel of Judas”, if it is authentic)? Find out that a huge part of the gospel was written by a guy who didn’t even know Jesus? Yeah, I’ll spend the money on a nice meal, thanks.[/quote]
So you have the answer before you’ve begun your inquiry. Actually, you have no interest in beginning an inquiry beyond what you read on various da’wa websites, right?
Edit: I also find the assertion that there were no Gospels written by apostles rather dubious considering Matthew and John were, in fact, apostles.
BTW, was the Qur’an actually written by Mohammed himself, or did others around him at the time write it down or memorize it (the Qurra) for him and then write it down later? I wonder if the same standard could be applied to the New Testament?
As far as transmission is concerned, would it be appropriate to discuss Uthman’s burning of the additional copies of the Qur’an at this juncture?
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
So you have the answer before you’ve begun your inquiry. Actually, you have no interest in beginning an inquiry beyond what you read on various da’wa websites, right? [/quote]
I don’t speak Arabic, and I’d appreciate it if you’d stop throwing in Arabic words. I have no idea what a “da’wa website” is, and I have to say, I suspect I’m not interested.
So that would be a no.
[quote]
Edit: I also find the assertion that there were no Gospels written by apostles rather dubious considering Matthew and John were, in fact, apostles. [/quote]
The book of Matthew was not written by Matthew, and you know it. The authorship of the book of John is more controversial, since there is no clearcut amswer. But what we do know is that the aithor doesn’t identify himself, and that the works attributed to John appear not have been written by the same person.
Maybe you should begin your own inquiry. And rather than reading the opinions of christian fundamentalist intent on ignoring any evidence that clashes with their dogmatic expectations, you should read some secular scholars.
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
So you have the answer before you’ve begun your inquiry. Actually, you have no interest in beginning an inquiry beyond what you read on various da’wa websites, right?
I don’t speak Arabic, and I’d appreciate it if you’d stop throwing in Arabic words. I have no idea what a “da’wa website” is, and I have to say, I suspect I’m not interested.
So that would be a no.
Edit: I also find the assertion that there were no Gospels written by apostles rather dubious considering Matthew and John were, in fact, apostles.
The book of Matthew was not written by Matthew, and you know it. The authorship of the book of John is more controversial, since there is no clearcut amswer. But what we do know is that the aithor doesn’t identify himself, and that the works attributed to John appear not have been written by the same person.
Maybe you should begin your own inquiry. And rather than reading the opinions of christian fundamentalist intent on ignoring any evidence that clashes with their dogmatic expectations, you should read some secular scholars.[/quote]
Shall I stop using the word “Qur’an” because you don’t speak ARabic as well? How about the words “Hadith” or “Jihad” or “Sirah?” What’s off limits here?
Did the Qurra identify themselves as well? How about the people who compiled the original Qur’rans that Uthman burned?
I see. You and secular scholars are entitled to their dogma and presuppositions, but Christians aren’t allowed theirs.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Shall I stop using the word “Qur’an” because you don’t speak ARabic as well? How about the words “Hadith” or “Jihad” or “Sirah?” What’s off limits here?[/quote]
Don’t be an ass.
[quote]
Did the Qurra identify themselves as well? How about the people who compiled the original Qur’rans that Uthman burned? [/quote]
I don’t see how this relates to the gospel.
Making conclusions is not a sign of dogma, ignoring clear evidence is.
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Shall I stop using the word “Qur’an” because you don’t speak ARabic as well? How about the words “Hadith” or “Jihad” or “Sirah?” What’s off limits here?
Don’t be an ass.
Did the Qurra identify themselves as well? How about the people who compiled the original Qur’rans that Uthman burned?
I don’t see how this relates to the gospel.
I see. You and secular scholars are entitled to their dogma and presuppositions, but Christians aren’t allowed theirs.
Making conclusions is not a sign of dogma, ignoring clear evidence is.[/quote]
Perhaps you could list some authors making these assertions. Right now, your assertion is unsubstantiated. I can’t just search the web to try to pin down where you’ve gotten your information.
[quote]lixy wrote:
So, according to the OP, people care too much about “gay marriage”. I find the fact that he started a thread on the topic very amusing.[/quote]
I think it’s the caring to much about it being there thing, not caring about it overall.
Gay people are going to be gay no matter if they can marry or not. So… why not let them so they’ll shut up about it?
So you don’t think little kids will get confused looking at thier butt holes wondering were babes come from after seeing their dad ridding his boyfriend’s pooper?[/quote]
I don’t know whether my parents ever have had anal sex either - never watched them. Why would you let [edit] your kids to that?
[quote]That is quite the explanation: “yes son, I know I told you babes come from a man and a woman having sex, but no, Steve will not have a baby out of his butt in 9 months!”
I’m sure that would cause no problems at all for kids growing up.
Riiight![/quote]
Children don’t seem to suffer from the fact that their heterosexual parents have non-procreative sex either.
On the other hand, I received full sex education from my parents and in school from age eight onwards. There was no confusion, no problem and no suffering - because I was informed.
Growing up with your parents being hypocrites who fill your head with prejudice or worse, just nothing - now that’s a different thing…
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Shall I stop using the word “Qur’an” because you don’t speak ARabic as well? How about the words “Hadith” or “Jihad” or “Sirah?” What’s off limits here?
Don’t be an ass.
Did the Qurra identify themselves as well? How about the people who compiled the original Qur’rans that Uthman burned?
I don’t see how this relates to the gospel.
I see. You and secular scholars are entitled to their dogma and presuppositions, but Christians aren’t allowed theirs.
Making conclusions is not a sign of dogma, ignoring clear evidence is.
Perhaps you could list some authors making these assertions. Right now, your assertion is unsubstantiated. I can’t just search the web to try to pin down where you’ve gotten your information.
[/quote]
So you don’t think little kids will get confused looking at thier butt holes wondering were babes come from after seeing their dad ridding his boyfriend’s pooper?
I don’t know whether my parents ever have had anal sex either - never watched them. Why would you let [edit] your kids to that?
[/quote]
I don’t know what gays would do as parents or not. But, from the gay organizations they tend to state how free and liberal they are in terms of sexuality. So it would stand to reason that they would not care if a kid was watching them having sex.
Like I said, traditionally and statistically, heterosexuals are more restrained when it comes to sexual practices. So that is where the assumption comes from.
So are you saying you were raised by gay parents?
[quote]
Growing up with your parents being hypocrites who fill your head with prejudice or worse, just nothing - now that’s a different thing…
Makkun[/quote]
Not sure what that is implying. But people should be free to have their own moral views on behavior. And there is nothing hypocritical about not agreeing with certain behavior or lifestyle practices unless you do them yourself.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
I don’t know what gays would do as parents or not. But, from the gay organizations they tend to state how free and liberal they are in terms of sexuality. So it would stand to reason that they would not care if a kid was watching them having sex.[/quote]
Worst. Logic. Ever.
Most if not all people I know, gay or not, don’t think kids should walk in on anyone having sex, much less their own parents.
Damn man, women must hate you. Cut loose in the sack you boring motherfucker. Your wife/GF will thank you.
I’d like to see these statistics.
When the hell did he say that?
Yes, you’re certainly free to have your own views. But don’t go forcing said views on others. You don’t like gay marriage? I suggest marrying a woman then.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Anecdotally, I have known kids raised by gays and they tend to be very straight and heterosexually. IMO, I think they see first hand how screwed up their mommies or daddies are and so they tend to not want anything to do with homosexually.[/quote]
Then:
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
I don’t know what gays would do as parents or not. But, from the gay organizations they tend to state how free and liberal they are in terms of sexuality. So it would stand to reason that they would not care if a kid was watching them having sex.
[/quote]
Help us understand which of these statements is true. I’ve been following you up to now but that last post makes me thing you’ll say anything.
I don’t know what gays would do as parents or not. But, from the gay organizations they tend to state how free and liberal they are in terms of sexuality. So it would stand to reason that they would not care if a kid was watching them having sex.[/quote]
So you do imply that they would. Wow, that’s quite a disturbing prejudice you’re displaying here. Fortunately, as gay people are just normal, they share a healthy respect for privacy and appropriateness just like us heteros.
[quote][…]
Like I said, traditionally and statistically, heterosexuals are more restrained when it comes to sexual practices. So that is where the assumption comes from.[/quote]
How do you define, quantify and source this? Staying with your fixation on gay anal sex - you’d be surprised by the numbers of heterosexuals who practice that. So again - you base your assumption on prejudice.
[quote][…]
So are you saying you were raised by gay parents?[/quote]
No, I was raised by heterosexual parents - my point was that it wouldn’t make too much of a difference. What has definitely an effect is when parents raise their children to have prejudiced views about the sexuality of others, whether through teaching them directly, bad example or via neglect.
[quote][…]
Not sure what that is implying. But people should be free to have their own moral views on behavior. And there is nothing hypocritical about not agreeing with certain behavior or lifestyle practices unless you do them yourself.[/quote]
Yes, and you are free to do so. Gay marriage doesn’t impede upon your right to have your views. And as long as your views don’t impede on their chance to express their perfectly legal and healthy expressions of their morals and behaviour, that’s fine. Stopping to always imply the worst when it comes to gay people would help with that.
God damn, this thread is fun - we’ve got gay marriage, guys hitting each other with bible quotes (wow PRCalDude, you know your shit), lixy/islam bashing. All we need is a tribunal, pictures of tits (does my Leela pic count?) and lolcats (Makavali enter stage from the right).
[quote]makkun wrote:
God damn, this thread is fun - we’ve got gay marriage, guys hitting each other with bible quotes (wow PRCalDude, you know your shit), lixy/islam bashing. All we need is a tribunal, pictures of tits (does my Leela pic count?) and lolcats (Makavali enter stage from the right).
Makkun[/quote]
Hey, fuck you man. I enter from the rear. Just ask my girlfriend.
[quote]905Patrick wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Anecdotally, I have known kids raised by gays and they tend to be very straight and heterosexually. IMO, I think they see first hand how screwed up their mommies or daddies are and so they tend to not want anything to do with homosexually.
Then:
Lorisco wrote:
I don’t know what gays would do as parents or not. But, from the gay organizations they tend to state how free and liberal they are in terms of sexuality. So it would stand to reason that they would not care if a kid was watching them having sex.
Help us understand which of these statements is true. I’ve been following you up to now but that last post makes me thing you’ll say anything.[/quote]
It’s the difference between what I have seen personally (that is what anecdotal means) and what statistics or actual data may show.
So the kids I know raised by gays seem to have turned out ok, but they may be the minority in terms of others or actual statistically significant data.
So to be fair I’m stating that all I know is what I have seen and it may be different than the majority.
