First of all, for starters I am not a fundamentalist. But as a Christian and a fairly well read person, I can tell you that this guy's "arguments" are not very compelling. If you're going to fight fundamentalism, you're going to have to do better than this drivel.
More "intellectual gems" from the link:
[QUOTETerrorism against the minority Irish Catholics in Northern Ireland is launched by British Protestant Fundamentalists.][/QUOTE]
However, Lot, the father of this one so-called godly family, does an interesting thing. In chapter 19, verse 8, the Bible tells how Lot offered to give his virgin daughters to these men so that they might rape them instead. Is this how God wants us to protect ourselves from the "homosexual agenda," by offering to let them rape our virgin daughters? Ask that to the Fundamentalist and see how much they squirm.
Ridiculous argument - has the man even read the story? Lot's offering of his daughter's is not represented as noble or right. Any average fundamentalist knows this.
Nudity, according to the Fundamentalist however, causes people to lust, which according to Matthew 5:28 is a sin. And pornography, that is, images or stories of people engaged in sexual activity, is specifically designed to make people lust, so its existence must, by default, be a sin according to these people. The Bible, itself, however, would have to be considered pornography by this definition. In Song of Solomon 7:7-8, Solomon describes how satisfying the breasts of his lover are, and then tells how he longs to take hold of them and how he wants to climb onto the woman. And in Ezekiel 23:1-20 we read of two women with insatiable sexual appetites, and we are told of how men with penises the size of donkeys' would pour out horse-like quantities of, well, their "issue" upon these women's breasts. If viewing pornography is a sin, then reading the Bible would also a sin considering how much pornography is in it. Point out these verses to your Fundamentalist friends and see how much they sweat.
Wow, what a smart argument. Has anyone on this thread actually READ this article?
And even if we call him "Jesus," that's not his real name. In Greek it's "Iesous." in Hebrew it's "Joshua" or "Hoshea," and in Latin it's "Jesu." If his name is important, by which name should we call him? Indeed, if using his correct name is necessary, then no English-speaking Christian could be saved since we don't call him by his real name.
Oh lord. Is this a serious argument???
[QUOTEAll who call themselves "Christian" absolutely must forgive the sins of any other sinner - even the homosexual. ][/QUOTE]
Wait - I thought homosexuality isn't a sin? Where's the consistency in this guy's arguments?
"CATHOLICS ARE PAGANS - THEY PRAY TO MARY" Actually they don't. They ask Mary, who is considered to be a very godly woman - even though she is in spirit and no longer walking the earth, to pray on their behalf.
No, actually they DO - Catholics pray to Mary and other saints. Catholics believe that prayer is COMMUNICATION - not necessarily worship. I'm not saying that's right or wrong - I'm simply saying that Catholics DO pray to saints.
[QUOTEAsk them if they are absolutely positive that the Bible is right. Of course they'll say yes. Ask them if every word of it can be taken literally to understand God's creation plan for mankind. They'll say yes again. Then ask them if that means they believe God supports our right to use marijuana, cocaine, or opium. And of course, they'll say no. Then simply quote Genesis 1:29, where God states quite clearly that he made "every" plant and "every" seed to be used by mankind. If they indeed believe Genesis word for word, as they claim, they'll have to admit that God created marijuana, coca (which contains cocaine), and poppies (which contain opium) for use by humans.][/QUOTE]
This argument is used in the article to defend the concept of evolution. Wow, the intellectuality of this is AMAZING! I am sure that this argument will PROVE evolution to fundamentalists!
I also find no problem with homosexuality. It is a naturally-occurring part of life, and the use of the Bible to condemn, harass and belittle homosexuals is just plain evil. I wrote more about this in the article called
When Christ was Gay. On a side note here, it's also intriguing how many people assume I must be gay to take the positions I take. I'm not. If anything, I like women too much.
What a smart guy.
There was a lot more "ridiculosity" in this article but I got bored with reading such substandard crap.
