| Home | RSS Feeds |
| Funny Pictures | Funny Videos |
| Funny GIFs | YouTube Videos |
| Text/Links | Comic Editor |
| User Rankings | Channels |
| Copyright Removal Request | |
| |
Comments(230):
#214
-
highclassbean (02/03/2012) [-] christianfag here, too lazy to go through all the comments to see is someone posted this already, and im board enough to make a statement about religion on the internet.
this repost is looking at the verse in black and white. to truly understand these verses one must understand the situation in which timothy worked. in first-century jewish culture, women were not allowed to study, when paul said that women should learn in quietness and full submission, he was offering them a amazing new opportunity. paul did not want the women to teach because they didnt yet have enough knowledge or experience.
tl;dr fuck you, read it
this repost is looking at the verse in black and white. to truly understand these verses one must understand the situation in which timothy worked. in first-century jewish culture, women were not allowed to study, when paul said that women should learn in quietness and full submission, he was offering them a amazing new opportunity. paul did not want the women to teach because they didnt yet have enough knowledge or experience.
tl;dr fuck you, read it
#199
-
evilbetty (02/03/2012) [-] Why do people make comics hating on religion? To get toenail clippings.
Just as bad as retoasts IMO since the goal is the same.
Just as bad as retoasts IMO since the goal is the same.
#197
-
N. Korean citizen (02/03/2012) [-]
once again, another rage comic about how a woman is being stupid and how men are always right. . . wooopee sooooo funny. A lot of these views are, or portrayed more, as something that is very male dominated point of view.
#192
-
joemeister (02/03/2012) [-] **joemeister rolled a random image posted in comment #333 at Troll lvl 9 ** I have read the bible, but like any other books, you read certain parts, but lose information when trying to read the whole thing
#182
-
dudemiesterman (02/03/2012) [-] really dude? this is such a recent retoast. words cannot describe OP's Lamar Smithgotry.
#179
-
vunguard (02/03/2012) [-] First off, retoast.
(Skip to bottom for tl;dr)
Second, Timothy technically has no right to be in the Bible. You see, amongst several other of the Apostle Paul's letters, some of them were forged letters in the name of Paul by people to either A) help their community, B) attempt to help Paul in his job, or C) serve their own purposes. 6 of the 13 letters of Paul are believed to be in this family of forgeries, or are at least plausibly such, the Timothy's being more or less proven beyond all reasonable doubt to be fakes. Therefore, his argument is invalid.
However, hers is also invalid, not by the statement that homosexuality is a sin, because TECHNICALLY it is, but she isn't much better. Jesus didn't condemn homosexuals any more severely than, say, liars, thieves, adulterers, etc. It was another sin, and therefore its hypocritical to go after that one while others are just as bad. What's more, with the exceptions of the "holy men" who were about as holy as Justin Bieber, Jesus never got truly angry, and therefore her anger counteracts her own beliefs.
TL;DR Timothy's a bad choice of arguments, but she shouldn't be complaining about it either, so they're both idiots, although I praise the man's brilliance.
And yes, I am Christian, but not one of those people who let the literal translation distract me from the spirit in which it was written.
(Skip to bottom for tl;dr)
Second, Timothy technically has no right to be in the Bible. You see, amongst several other of the Apostle Paul's letters, some of them were forged letters in the name of Paul by people to either A) help their community, B) attempt to help Paul in his job, or C) serve their own purposes. 6 of the 13 letters of Paul are believed to be in this family of forgeries, or are at least plausibly such, the Timothy's being more or less proven beyond all reasonable doubt to be fakes. Therefore, his argument is invalid.
However, hers is also invalid, not by the statement that homosexuality is a sin, because TECHNICALLY it is, but she isn't much better. Jesus didn't condemn homosexuals any more severely than, say, liars, thieves, adulterers, etc. It was another sin, and therefore its hypocritical to go after that one while others are just as bad. What's more, with the exceptions of the "holy men" who were about as holy as Justin Bieber, Jesus never got truly angry, and therefore her anger counteracts her own beliefs.
TL;DR Timothy's a bad choice of arguments, but she shouldn't be complaining about it either, so they're both idiots, although I praise the man's brilliance.
And yes, I am Christian, but not one of those people who let the literal translation distract me from the spirit in which it was written.
#176
-
alirabhmp (02/03/2012) [-]
retoast but im happy cuz i forgot to favorite this last time it was up
