NationStates Jolt Archive

Ogiek is saying that Christians are hypocrites and that nothing should be censored.

Christians say what they say based on the Bible.

Does Ogiek have any authority to justify saying that network TV can air any sleaze they want?

Or are his standards out of his own head?

I said some fundamentalist Christians who wish to impose censorship are hypocrites. And while I did not say nothing should be censored, I do believe nothing legal should be censored.

The networks already air sleaze, and guess what? People love it. I don't understand how people can spend so much of their life watching absolute crap, but hey, that is not for me to judge. If networks want to air all-porn, all the time, then we, as an audience, have the option to turn it off. No viewers = no commercials = no revenue = no porn. Very simple.

And yes, my standards are out of my head. I don't want anyone else imposing their standards on me.

So man can make any law he wants?

Man's laws must be based on God's laws.

Forgiveness is not law. That is out of God's mere good pleasure.

Are Jesus' commands not law? Please read the Gospels. Jesus commanded forgiveness.
"'Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?"
Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times."

Jesus chided the Pharisee for making God's law into Man's law and for placing the law before doing good. His disciples harvested grain on the Sabbath, he healed on the Sabbath - all at which time was against the Laws of Man, which the Pharisees held as were the Laws of God. Man's laws cannot be God's laws for Man is not God.

{pats Ogiek on the back}

You have my pity and sympathy. I tend to be grossly misunderstood a lot of the time, as well.

Maybe the Bible should have one of those warning stickers you see on so many music CDs?

Ezekiel 23:19-20

Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Genesis 19:31-32

One day the older daughter said to the younger, "Our father is old, and there is no man around here to lie with us, as is the custom all over the earth. Let's get our father to drink wine and then lie with him and preserve our family line through our father."


Song of Solomon 7

1 How beautiful your sandaled feet,
O prince's daughter!
Your graceful legs are like jewels,
the work of a craftsman's hands.
2 Your navel is a rounded goblet
that never lacks blended wine.
Your waist is a mound of wheat
encircled by lilies.
3 Your breasts are like two fawns,
twins of a gazelle....

7 Your stature is like that of the palm,
and your breasts like clusters of fruit.
8 I said, "I will climb the palm tree;
I will take hold of its fruit."

Who knows how much sex and violence our nation's young people are being exposed to through this book? Maybe Congress should form a committee to investigate?


And if 9 year olds ever actually read Ezekiel, Song of Solomon, or even the end of Genesis it might be different.

However, I know just how much of the bible I had read before I was 15, and it consisted of Daniel and the Lion's Den, Jonah and the Whale, Noah and the Ark, and other choice stories that contain nothing worse than a little violence, which earns them a PG rating. Besides, PA stickers are for language, and usually not unless it contains superfluous numbers of F-words. Therefore, this whole discussion is entirely based outside the realm of reality.

And if 9 year olds ever actually read Ezekiel, Song of Solomon, or even the end of Genesis it might be different.

However, I know just how much of the bible I had read before I was 15, and it consisted of Daniel and the Lion's Den, Jonah and the Whale, Noah and the Ark, and other choice stories that contain nothing worse than a little violence, which earns them a PG rating. Besides, PA stickers are for language, and usually not unless it contains superfluous numbers of F-words. Therefore, this whole discussion is entirely based outside the realm of reality.

Welcome to the thread. Don't bother reading any of the other previous posts. They would only confuse you by spelling out for the literal minded that this is an ironical commentary on fundamentalist Christians who would ban secular content when their own holy book is as racy and violent as anything you would hear on Howard Stern or see on Skinamax.

Ok, I just spent about an hour reading the 12 new pages of this.

Ok, we are NOT trying to censor the Bible. We are trying to eliminate censorship. Ogiek used IRONY to get your attention.

Why? Ok, think back to Nov 11, 2004, when a lot of bible-thumpin parents wrote to ABC and affilates, and demanded they NOT AIR Saving Private Ryan, becuase it contained Language and Violence, (none of which actually existed during WWII <- that was sarcasm), and actually, it was their choice to watch it. So, becuase of the fact that they love 'family values', or rather, the Christianity's 'Good Book'. But Ogiek, apparently hating this CENSORSHIP (and btw, if they dont want their children watching that movie, then DONT WATCH IT!) used a common literairy device IRONY to say "Do not censor my movies becuase the item which you determine what is good or not is full of Violence, Sex, and gore."

As to the person who said that the bible doesn't endorse this behavior, guess what? Those Sci-fi movies where the guy gets bitten in half don't endorse that behavior.

I wish you could see what we are saying. We are not trying to censor the bible, nor trying to expose kids to porn. We are trying to eliminate consorship in a constructive, clever way. I would say that I am saddend that you cannot see our point, but that would be condesending.

I agree. But Christian politicians, who have accpeted Christ, such as George Bush (whether you agree that he's really Christian, or that that he has really done so) should promote and uphold Christianity, especially on issues like gay marriage, abortion, etc.

1)There is a difference between upholding - which is personal, and codifying into secualar law -which is societal.

2)If the laws should be encoded should not they all? Where are the proposed laws against adultery. Where are the proposed laws to make charity and good deeds mandatory? Law is in the thou shalls as much or moreso than in the thou shalt nots.

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'
"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

Ok, I just spent about an hour reading the 12 new pages of this.

Ok, we are NOT trying to censor the Bible. We are trying to eliminate censorship. Ogiek used IRONY to get your attention.

Why? Ok, think back to Nov 11, 2004, when a lot of bible-thumpin parents wrote to ABC and affilates, and demanded they NOT AIR Saving Private Ryan, becuase it contained Language and Violence, (none of which actually existed during WWII <- that was sarcasm), and actually, it was their choice to watch it. So, becuase of the fact that they love 'family values', or rather, the Christianity's 'Good Book'. But Ogiek, apparently hating this CENSORSHIP (and btw, if they dont want their children watching that movie, then DONT WATCH IT!) used a common literairy device IRONY to say "Do not censor my movies becuase the item which you determine what is good or not is full of Violence, Sex, and gore."

As to the person who said that the bible doesn't endorse this behavior, guess what? Those Sci-fi movies where the guy gets bitten in half don't endorse that behavior.

I wish you could see what we are saying. We are not trying to censor the bible, nor trying to expose kids to porn. We are trying to eliminate consorship in a constructive, clever way. I would say that I am saddend that you cannot see our point, but that would be condesending.

{pats Ogiek on the back}

You have my pity and sympathy. I tend to be grossly misunderstood a lot of the time, as well.

"The sagacious reader who is capable of reading between these lines what does not stand written in them, but is nevertheless implied, will be able to form some conception." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Yes! What they said. ;)

Thanks.

Aeolian is an obscure musical term that most people don't know about. Today we use the word "minor." Fun stuff, I suppose.

Hey, I knew the term. :)

And if 9 year olds ever actually read Ezekiel, Song of Solomon, or even the end of Genesis it might be different.

However, I know just how much of the bible I had read before I was 15, and it consisted of Daniel and the Lion's Den, Jonah and the Whale, Noah and the Ark, and other choice stories that contain nothing worse than a little violence, which earns them a PG rating. Besides, PA stickers are for language, and usually not unless it contains superfluous numbers of F-words. Therefore, this whole discussion is entirely based outside the realm of reality.
It was even less likely that I would have been up past 11 to watch a movie with sex in it too so sense it was not likely we should show porno’s after 11 pm

(logical extension of your argument)

You want the book, to have parentel warning on it? Wo

The Bible is horrible!

Look at this:

http://frogstar.com/aybabtu/images/f-30106206.jpg

I think that you need to specify certain religious leaders, but most definitely. An idea which seems widely spread among the Christian right (Falwell in particular) is that God doles out earthly punishments and rewards based upon the actions of a the people's of a nation. They use this as a pretext for trying to get "Christian" laws passed. But there is NO ACTION that is Christian without faith. Furthermore such religious leaders completely ignore that Jesus said that no earthly reward (ie God's favor or protection) is to be expected - and that in fact acting for the sake of receiving earthly reward cancels out whatever moral good may have been done.

The very religious leaders who are trying to get the Christian laws passed even admit that God's laws are not what makes a person good or righteous as the fundamentalist Christian doctrine hold that there can be no salvation without accepting Chist. Thus there is no way that simply following God's laws can make a person more godly. Passing moralistic laws in no way promotes or upholds Christianity. Therefore, there must be an ulterior motive.

God's favor and / or protection is not an earthly reward. Earthly rewards are
are things like wealth, & possessions of the world. But I do agree with you
concerning passing moralistic laws, because God did give man free will.

the bible tells us not judge unless we wish to be judged by the same standard.those who wish to censor violence and sex fail this test when it comes to the source of there morality,the bible.hence they are hypocrits,and ignoreing scripture to boot.fun no?

Notice that all the Christians stopped posting?

Maybe the Bible should have one of those warning stickers you see on so many music CDs?

Ezekiel 23:19-20

Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Genesis 19:31-32

One day the older daughter said to the younger, "Our father is old, and there is no man around here to lie with us, as is the custom all over the earth. Let's get our father to drink wine and then lie with him and preserve our family line through our father."


Song of Solomon 7

1 How beautiful your sandaled feet,
O prince's daughter!
Your graceful legs are like jewels,
the work of a craftsman's hands.
2 Your navel is a rounded goblet
that never lacks blended wine.
Your waist is a mound of wheat
encircled by lilies.
3 Your breasts are like two fawns,
twins of a gazelle....

7 Your stature is like that of the palm,
and your breasts like clusters of fruit.
8 I said, "I will climb the palm tree;
I will take hold of its fruit."

Deuteronomy 25:11-12

If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.

Who knows how much sex and violence our nation's young people are being exposed to through this book? Maybe Congress should form a committee to investigate?

another bump to the next level of irony

Highly recommended link. I think many of you will QUITE enjoy this.

The Brick Testament (http://www.thebricktestament.com)

And I listen to it on the radio, too. You were quoting the gorgeous poetry of Psalms and a couple stories about the consequences of choosing sin over choosing God's will.

It's in light of topics like this from people who truly do not understand nor want to understand what the world is all about that I feel I'm no longer going to waste my time with this site. Most Christians are sinners, just like you guys. The difference is that we're forgiven and that we have hope in our hearts because we recognize what a fantastic gift that God/Jesus gave us, and we're trying our hardest to live according to God's will, not our own.

I don't get trying to lash out at Christians for their beliefs. I don't lash out at unbelievers for their lack of beliefs. I disagree, sure, and I would love to debate and prove non-Christians wrong, but I find that usually Christians are just attacked for their beliefs and when they defend them, they're met with silence. Mostly because people who attack don't understand one iota of what they're attacking.

Sound familiar to anyone?

And I listen to it on the radio, too. You were quoting the gorgeous poetry of Psalms and a couple stories about the consequences of choosing sin over choosing God's will.

It's in light of topics like this from people who truly do not understand nor want to understand what the world is all about that I feel I'm no longer going to waste my time with this site. Most Christians are sinners, just like you guys. The difference is that we're forgiven and that we have hope in our hearts because we recognize what a fantastic gift that God/Jesus gave us, and we're trying our hardest to live according to God's will, not our own.

I don't get trying to lash out at Christians for their beliefs. I don't lash out at unbelievers for their lack of beliefs. I disagree, sure, and I would love to debate and prove non-Christians wrong, but I find that usually Christians are just attacked for their beliefs and when they defend them, they're met with silence. Mostly because people who attack don't understand one iota of what they're attacking.

Sound familiar to anyone?

What an odd misunderstanding of the topic. No one is attacking Christians or their beliefs. Neither is anyone claiming to interpret the Bible or any passage in it.

This is a commentary on those fundamentalist Christians who wish to censor secular material based upon their own religious ideology.

Just a little ironic commentary on those who are into book banning and censorship. Nothing for you to get bent out of shape about.

Just reading the first post says this thread needs more harmonica.

Harmonica (http://louhi.kempele.fi/~skyostil/archive/dump/flash/yuri_harmonica.swf)

What an odd misunderstanding of the topic. No one is attacking Christians or their beliefs. Neither is anyone claiming to interpret the Bible or any passage in it.

This is a commentary on those fundamentalist Christians who wish to censor secular material based upon their own religious ideology.

Just a little ironic commentary on those who are into book banning and censorship. Nothing for you to get bent out of shape about.
Humorless people lol

I think someone should do a study on religion and the effect/comprehension of irony specifically

And expand it to jokes … intelligence levels … and so on so forth (not saying religious folks are dumb rather would like to see a coloration) cause there is a whole lot of “didn’t get it” comin from the other side

That would be an interesting study

Once again, no one on this forum seems to understand fundamentalism. But I digress that for another topic.

The only thing that angers me is that you are implying that all Christians who read their Bible want to censor anything and everything. That is like me saying every gay person is flaming and always wearing tight leather pants a pink shirt and talks with a high voice and a "ssss" in the things they say. But of course if I said that, I would be the criminal and not the other side who equally generalizes.
welp off to school, so this post was rushed.

Once again, no one on this forum seems to understand fundamentalism. But I digress that for another topic.

The only thing that angers me is that you are implying that all Christians who read their Bible want to censor anything and everything. That is like me saying every gay person is flaming and always wearing tight leather pants a pink shirt and talks with a high voice and a "ssss" in the things they say. But of course if I said that, I would be the criminal and not the other side who equally generalizes.
welp off to school, so this post was rushed.
I agree … though it has been a fairly constant stand by the church itself and its clergy so yes not all the members may be associated with censoring but the church itself seems to have a tendency to do so (and if the church doesn’t speak generally for most of its members who does? and if you don’t agree with things your church is saying/doing why do you continue going? Wouldn’t that be “perpetrating evil” … always thought blind faith was a funny thing)

The only thing that angers me is that you are implying that all Christians who read their Bible want to censor anything and everything.

Nothing of the sort has been stated or implied. Of course, not all fundamentalist Christians want to censor secular literature and entertainment. However, almost all people in the United States who advocate censorship are fundamentalist Christians.

bumpty-bump

I agree that many Christians do take censorship too far. I know someone for instance that thinks boxing is wrong (mind you not a popular belief among Christians, even Paul the Apostle was a big boxing and athletic fan) but still I know many Christians do take it too far, but I find stereotyping all to common especially on forums. And both sides mind you not one.

I get what you're saying about the hypocrisy of some fundamentalist Christians who don't hold the Bible to the same standards of other things that they say ought to be censored.

I'm saying that this isn't hypocrisy, because the Bible isn't in the same category as these other things. It's in a class by itself.

This is because the Bible is the perfect and infallible Word of God.


I don't intend to return to this thread. It has passed the point of usefulness.

This is because the Bible is the perfect and infallible Word of God.
No it isnt. This isnt the Quaran (in the sense that it was meant to have been dictated by God to Muhammed who wrote it down, Im not saying that Islam, or any other religion, is right). Most of it was written by people who even the bible never claimed had any direct conversation with God.

I know that this will probably get me flamed, but it seems as though a lot of "Christians" havent even read or understood the bible...

EDIT: Not to mention that any bible you or most people have ever read has been translated at least three times, and the "original" version of The New Testament concerning Christ's ministry was written 80 - 100 years after the events it depicts.

I get what you're saying about the hypocrisy of some fundamentalist Christians who don't hold the Bible to the same standards of other things that they say ought to be censored.

I'm saying that this isn't hypocrisy, because the Bible isn't in the same category as these other things. It's in a class by itself.

This is because the Bible is the perfect and infallible Word of God.


I don't intend to return to this thread. It has passed the point of usefulness.

http://www.fotosearch.com/comp/PHD/PHD529/200021811-001.jpg

The only thing that angers me is that you are implying that all Christians who read their Bible want to censor anything and everything.

Not every Christian - or even fundamentalist Christian - wants to ban books and movies of which they disapprove. However, those (in the United States) who vocally and enthusiastically favor censorship do tend to also be fundamentalist Christians.

Children can get childrens bibles.

Maybe it should have printed on the front;

"Not for small Children or Big Babies"

Genesis 3:12-33

And God said unto thee: Thy do not like thy lovely man-bottom. 'Tis much too noble to be unto thy smelly horse-shoe. And they all lay before the lumpy one and asked when their sitting room would be lovely and finished for it was time for a change, they were always brought about by squirrels. Oh thy thy and amen.
(sorry to have to revive and old thread by the way) hahHAHAHHAHHahhahahHHAHAHhHahhahahhahahaha! such Wit, i love you sir! i truly do!

The woman in the first quote is a symbol for the nation of Israel that had turned away from God. This is condemned as evil! The second half of the chapter talks about how the Lord will smite her.
"Thus says the Lord God . . . you shall pay for you idolatrous sins."

You have to admit, though, the donkey-schlong and horse jizz references were not exactly necessary.



Now, Song of Solomon. This one really bugs me. Christians do NOT believe that anything to do with sex is wrong. Sex, as part of creation, is a GIFT OF GOD. And He has made LAWS for how it may be used, specifically, only between husband and wife.

Or, you know, one of his concubines.