Author Topic: For the Bible Tells Me So  (Read 1634 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 73109

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4999
  • Gender: Male
For the Bible Tells Me So
« on: July 06, 2011, 08:53:29 PM »
I think everybody needs to watch this. It is about bible litteralism and how it goes against what the bible really is talking about, and it focuses on anti-homosexuality.


https://www.archive.org/details/ForTheBibleTellsMeSo

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12785
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: For the Bible Tells Me So
« Reply #1 on: July 07, 2011, 07:34:25 AM »
From the first 2-minutes (as if I have time to watch the whole hour and 40-minute thing), looks like an anti-religion hate piece to me.  And why exactly does this need its own thread, given that it appears to be on the same topic as what is currently being discussed in several active threads?
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: For the Bible Tells Me So
« Reply #2 on: July 07, 2011, 07:50:12 AM »
looks like an anti-religion hate piece to me.

I got 4 minutes in, and didn't detect a shred of what your talking about. Seems like maybe you wanted to see it as that from the start, tbh.

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12785
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: For the Bible Tells Me So
« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2011, 08:03:09 AM »
I didn't go into it necessarily "wanting" to see it as anything.  But two minutes in, all I saw were ridiculous religious stereotypes and stereotypical "scary music" dubbed in the background.  If there's more to it, then cool.  But since I doubt few people here have 1:40 to sit down and watch it, and since this is a discussion forum, it would be nice if someone who has actually seen it post some discussion points rather than just a link.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Online hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 52775
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: For the Bible Tells Me So
« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2011, 09:34:26 AM »
That would be helpful.  I certainly don't have a spare hour and 40 minutes.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline 73109

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4999
  • Gender: Male
Re: For the Bible Tells Me So
« Reply #5 on: July 07, 2011, 10:41:38 AM »
One of the more interesting aspects explained that while "lying with another man" is an abomination, just a little while earlier in the book is says that eating pork is an abomination. Just like working on the sabbath and wearing wool and linen. All of these "offenses" are punishable by death, and I ask you, how many times have you worked on Sunday while chomping on a ham sandwich?

Offline William Wallace

  • Posts: 2791
Re: For the Bible Tells Me So
« Reply #6 on: July 07, 2011, 10:42:16 AM »
It looks like an apologetic for liberal Christianity, made by people who aren't religious. While the film's correct that there are some kooky fundamentalists, the position it stakes out is no more theologically sound. And I'll never understand the fascination with the extremist churches' view of homosexuality. How many of these crusading documentaries do we need?

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12785
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: For the Bible Tells Me So
« Reply #7 on: July 07, 2011, 11:14:01 AM »
One of the more interesting aspects explained that while "lying with another man" is an abomination, just a little while earlier in the book is says that eating pork is an abomination. Just like working on the sabbath and wearing wool and linen. All of these "offenses" are punishable by death, and I ask you, how many times have you worked on Sunday while chomping on a ham sandwich?

Since I'm not a Jew, I find none of that relevant (although I suppose it is mildly interesting).  However, if I were a Jew and bound by those passages, I would point out a few things about your post:
1.  No, not all of those are punishable by death.  Some are, but others are not.
2.  Regarding the "abomination" thing--what I do find interesting is that two different phrases are used in connection with different offenses.  Regarding the "lying with another man," for example, the passage states that it is detestable.  (or, in some translations, "an abomination")  There is no qualifier.  Regarding most of the other things you mentioned, the terminology is slightly different.  It says, either with regard to some of the dietary laws, "it shall be unclean to you," or with respect to others, "it shall be detestable to you."  It is interesting to me that to some things that qualifier is added.  I could be wrong, but to me, that implies that these things are considered very different to God.  If something is unqualifiedly detestable, it is something that God considers morally wrong as an absolute.  With regard to those other things, I note first of all that they were rules given solely to the Jews, and were neither prohibited to anyone prior to the laws given to the Jewish nation or to Christians thereafter, nor does God ever pronounce judgment on gentile nations during the time of the Old Testament for not keeping those rules.  So I think an accurate paraphase of the "detestable to you" phrase might be, "these things are not morally wrong in an absolute sense, but you are prohibited from doing them, so you are to treat them as if they were."  That makes perfect sense to me given that some of those things were explicitly prohibited for Jews, but then later explicitly permitted for Christians (eating pork, for example; or failing to observe the sabbath).
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."