Joy Behar of ‘The View’ apologizes for Christianity comment

Awful lot of Christians fought to preserve slavery, as well.

Definitions change over time.

People have always used religious texts to justify whatever their personal opinion is at the time.

For example, IMO, you can't really find any clear directive in the Bible to claim it endorses a Prohibition-style ban on alcohol. You can reasonably claim that it says to not get drunk, or perhaps abstain entirely, but not an endorsement that governments should ban alcohol altogether.

However, there was a time in this country not all that long ago when that was mainstream political thought. IMO, it actually was their own personal opinion that alcohol should be banned, and they went to a religious book of authority in an attempt to justify it rather than try and argue their point on their own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
People have always used religious texts to justify whatever their personal opinion is at the time.

For example, IMO, you can't really find any clear directive in the Bible to claim it endorses a Prohibition-style ban on alcohol. You can reasonably claim that it says to not get drunk, or perhaps abstain entirely, but not an endorsement that governments should ban alcohol altogether.

However, there was a time in this country not all that long ago when that was mainstream political thought. IMO, it actually was their own personal opinion that alcohol should be banned, and they went to a religious book of authority in an attempt to justify it rather than try and argue their point on their own.

I agree. Where I fault the text is the instances where it appears to endorse ( or maybe just not object to) slavery or the beating of one's wife. If this is truly God's word why not declare them wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Ironically enough, that's exactly what my Pastor's sermon was about last week..... The fallacy of judging someone's faith based on what you perceive as moral at any given time.

Interesting.

Did your pastor include the premise that their faith was the base of their morality?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
People have always used religious texts to justify whatever their personal opinion is at the time.

For example, IMO, you can't really find any clear directive in the Bible to claim it endorses a Prohibition-style ban on alcohol. You can reasonably claim that it says to not get drunk, or perhaps abstain entirely, but not an endorsement that governments should ban alcohol altogether.

However, there was a time in this country not all that long ago when that was mainstream political thought. IMO, it actually was their own personal opinion that alcohol should be banned, and they went to a religious book of authority in an attempt to justify it rather than try and argue their point on their own.

Imagine you are at a wedding. Weddings are festive events. People coming together from far and wide to celebrate the union of two families.

Would it have been a memorable event if Jesus had turned water into grape juice at a wedding? Or are we to conclude that Jesus actually did turn water into alcoholic wine?

If that isn't a clear enough endorsement, I don't know what more anyone could want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Imagine you are at a wedding. Weddings are festive events. People coming together from far and wide to celebrate the union of two families.

Would it have been a memorable event if Jesus had turned water into grape juice at a wedding? Or are we to conclude that Jesus actually did turn water into alcoholic wine?

If that isn't a clear enough endorsement, I don't know what more anyone could want.

You think Jesus turned water into grape juice at a wedding, and that is a Biblical endorsement for a governmental prohibition on alcoholic beverages? Really?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
You think Jesus turned water into grape juice at a wedding, and that is a Biblical endorsement for a governmental prohibition on alcoholic beverages? Really?

Do you think Jesus would have turned water in to Sam's Club cola or ole' scool pre-ban 4-Loco at the Walmart wedding in Pa earlier this week?
 
Do you think Jesus would have turned water in to Sam's Club cola or ole' scool pre-ban 4-Loco at the Walmart wedding in Pa earlier this week?

Perhaps cherry Kool-Aid?

BTW, my comment is not to ridicule the miracle at the Wedding at Cana. Whether or not you believe the story, if you look at the original Greek text, Jesus pretty clearly is said to have turned the water into regular, alcoholic wine. Not grape juice, a non-alcoholic wine, or anything else. And even if he did turn it into grape juice, how exactly do you extrapolate the endorsement of a government policy to ban all alcohol from that?

The mental gymnastics that people who are looking for a Biblical ban on alcohol have to go through when wine is mentioned are just funny.
 
Last edited:
She did it to save her job; your typical angry liberal woman with her hair on fire. She deserves forgiveness, guess it takes em' all to make the world go round.

[TWITTER]973588918905065472[/TWITTER]

That show, along with most other daytime tv shows, and a lot of nighttime ones, are reflective of the cancerous nature of too many Americans. I don't care what she says about Christians, I care that she and her co-hosts are idiots who are allowed to clog our airways.
 
That show, along with most other daytime tv shows, and a lot of nighttime ones, are reflective of the cancerous nature of too many Americans. I don't care what she says about Christians, I care that she and her co-hosts are idiots who are allowed to clog our airways.

But at least she's not a Georgia fan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
No, my support of gay rights is not a backhanded blow to Christians because, and I don't understand how Christians don't get this, giving gays equal rights does not affect Christians at all. Allowing gay marriage doesn't force Christians to do anything. It doesn't force them to change their beliefs about where gays ultimately end up. It is Christians that are always forcing others to live by their religious dogma.
This is the biggest whiny crock of horse ****. No one forces you to attend religious services, read religious text, or perform any religious activities.

Just because a Christian holds a position doesn't mean it is in and of itself religious. Is caring for widpws and orphans a religious position? What about laws against murder and theft?

I'll agree that many Christians lack the capacity to connect their faith to the natural law. But, that doesn't change the fact that positions such as pro life and pro traditional marriage have strong arguments apart from, "because the Bible says so."


Beyond that, the term "rights" means nothing in your context. It's arbitrary, unless you'd care to provide some grounding for those rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
This is the biggest whiny crock of horse ****. No one forces you to attend religious services, read religious text, or perform any religious activities.

Just because a Christian holds a position doesn't mean it is in and of itself religious. Is caring for widpws and orphans a religious position? What about laws against murder and theft?

I'll agree that many Christians lack the capacity to connect their faith to the natural law. But, that doesn't change the fact that positions such as pro life and pro traditional marriage have strong arguments apart from, "because the Bible says so."


Beyond that, the term "rights" means nothing in your context. It's arbitrary, unless you'd care to provide some grounding for those rights.

Well said. I am a Christian, but my pro-life position has nothing to do with religious belief.
 
This is the biggest whiny crock of horse ****. No one forces you to attend religious services, read religious text, or perform any religious activities.

Just because a Christian holds a position doesn't mean it is in and of itself religious. Is caring for widpws and orphans a religious position? What about laws against murder and theft?

I'll agree that many Christians lack the capacity to connect their faith to the natural law. But, that doesn't change the fact that positions such as pro life and pro traditional marriage have strong arguments apart from, "because the Bible says so."


Beyond that, the term "rights" means nothing in your context. It's arbitrary, unless you'd care to provide some grounding for those rights.

The bundle of rights granted by the Constitution and law in this country.

The Bible is the word of God. Why wouldn't God just condemn slavery and order all slaves freed? If slavery was an acceptable institution then, why not now?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
pence is a hypocrite as are the millions of evangelicals that sacrificed their principles on the altar of the amoral donald trump. Christianity isn't under attack, their double standards and hypocrisy are being called into question. :yes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
The bundle of rights granted by the Constitution and law in this country.

The Bible is the word of God. Why wouldn't God just condemn slavery and order all slaves freed? If slavery was an acceptable institution then, why not now?

Just because a law is a law doesn't make that law right or just, we are granted the grace to choose to follow God's laws or the laws of man.
 
Do you not believe that your god is the point from which morality is based?

Yes, but I wouldn't make government policy based on a religious belief. As far as political policy, you should be able to do what you want as long as it doesn't take away the rights of someone else.
 

VN Store



Back
Top