Hypocrisy?

Isn't it interesting that the Mormon Church backed Proposition 8 in California? This ballot initiative which is anti-gay, defines marriage as legal only between "one man and one woman"? Yet there are sects in that Church that still pratice polygyny: Marriage between one man and more than one woman.

 

Yeah some Mormons are cool with polygamy, most these days are not however. As far as I can tell most of them are against gay marriage too. It would be hypocrisy only if they where gay and married yet against gay marriage for others.

 

The thing about the religious is practically everything they say, do and believe is hypocrisy. The religious are all for telling us what to do and ignoring their own advice.

 

That is so true. Just look at the following conservative "traditional family value" advocates: These are just to name a few:

George Bush, drunk driving conviction, drug abuse (including alcohol)
John McCain--adulterer
Newt Gingrich--adulterer
Rush Limbaugh--drug addict
William Bennet--gambling addict
Sarah Palin--daughter's illegitimate teen pregnancy

 

Sorry but this list is a list of neocons. There is nothing conservative or traditional about them. What a jokeeee.
You want classical conservative, try Doctor Ron Paul whos been married to the same women for over 50 years, doesnt back outlandish spending and wants smaller government. This is true conservatism.

Anyone can pull a few people out of the bag and say they stand for traditional family values . For those 5 there are some very good ones out there. I guess mother theresa was bad one huh?

 

Mother Theresa didn't believe any of the shit she told others to believe, probably the biggest hypocrite of them all. Her entire life was fraudulent, She was simply going through the motions for her own gain.

 

True. It's so easy to pretend in this world full of fools. Her Wikipedia page says

"In 2002, the Vatican recognized as a miracle the healing of a tumor in the abdomen of an Indian woman, Monica Besra, following the application of a locket containing Mother Teresa's picture. Monica Besra said that a beam of light emanated from the picture, curing the cancerous tumor."

I'm not sure if I'm feeling angry or sad after reading this.

 

That wiki entry says she had doubts about the presence of God in her life, at the end of her life. It doesn't say she lived her whole life feeding others BS and it doesn't say she was an athiest. She may very well have believed it all and probably did. Either way, hypocrisy is not unique to the religious neither are they exempt from it. I am not exactly sure what she gained either. Wasn't she a broke-ass nun?

 

I didn't say she was an atheist, But in her own words she "had no faith".
Not all self serving endeavours result in financial gain.
And no, hypocrisy isn't unique to the religious, Though it is greater hypocrisy if people, for instance, spend their entire life condemning drug use and homosexuality before getting caught buying meth from a gay hooker, Like ted haggard did.

 

Any true christian will acknowledge that the bible is the only infallible source you can go by. Homosexuality (btw, why are there so many threads on this?) is clearly stated as being wrong in the bible. There is little mentioned in the bible about polygamy (sp?). We know that several in the old testament had multiple wives. However, in Titus it talks about qualifications for being a minister and one of those is "a man married to one wife" as well as the covenant of marriage being between one man and one woman. This pretty much eliminates both as being good practices in my book.

 

Thanks for clarifying I really haven't studied much about her life but I do see your point about self serving endeavors.

 

Eating shellfish is also "wrong" according to the bible, As it working on the sabbath. Never done either of them phpgator? or do you pick and chose which bits are "infallible" depending on what opinions you need justification for?

 

FYI, a lot of things changed after Jesus died on the cross. This includes anything that is listed as the law. You shouldn't have stopped reading at the book of Malachi.

 

I thought Jesus said he came to fulfill the Law (Torah?) not destroy it. That says to me not to eat shellfish. Of course I guess those sorts of questions are better asked of your priest.

 

So you have a "pick n' mix" version of christianity where you simply pick the bits that can be used to give justification for your preconceived opinions and prejudices and discard the bits that forbid you doing something you actually quite like, Such as eating shrimp... thanks for clearing that up.

 

lol, no, you have a terribly misconstrued view of what the bible says. Have you read it in entirety or are you going off of a athiest talking points website (you own one, don't you?) ?

Also earthfaze, you are exactly correct, he did come to fulfill it nor did we do away with it.

I would politely ask both of you to read this page: http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=880 I think it will hopefully clear up some of the confusion on how the Old Testament is to be used and followed today.

 

I am still reading it but so far it has just reaffirmed my belief that Saul was a con-man. It is some good information though, thanks for the link.

Edit:
Quote:
The Mosaic Law was a bilateral covenant made specifically for Israel alone to govern her life in the promised land. From the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen.12) we see Israel was a chosen nation, an instrument of God to become a channel of blessing to all nations. Yahweh was her Theocratic King who was to rule and guide the nation in her destiny that she might not become polluted or contaminated by other nations and could thus fulfill her purpose. For this the Mosaic Law was instituted to direct Israel as a nation in all spheres of her life—morally, socially, politically, economically and religiously.

By its very nature, the Mosaic Law was not to be, and could not be, obeyed to the letter by any other people in any other place as a rule of life. However, in the spirit of the Law it did set forth moral principles which were applicable and would bring blessing to all people anywhere and at any time when applied and used as a standard of right and wrong.


That is pretty much what I thought. I am not Jewish, do not have any Israeli ancestors and am not a follower of YHVH. I see no reason for me to adopt their laws, customs, or religious beliefs. That said if it works for me I'll do it, even if it means not eating shellfish But I won't do it just because YHVH told the Hebrews to do it.

 

Ahh i see, So the "infallible" text had to be amended and bits thrown out as irrelevant.. makes sense

 

stox, you clearly didn't read even a sentence of the site. You clearly don't know what you're talking about. Educate yourself on the matter of what the bible actually says, then get back to me and we can discuss it. Otherwise, you are just sadly misinformed on this topic.

I'm not trying to question your intelligence. There's a lot of science topics that I have heard you talk about and know that you have studied that area. But how can you run an athiest website and not have a clue what the bible says? How can you argue against something you know very little, or perhaps nothing, about?