Duck Dynasty, will Phil's interview doom the show?

• OSH

  

  queencitybuckeye;1555946 wrote:Not mentioned in either version of the bible I perused.

  bases_loaded;1555952 wrote:Its not possible that bestiality is listed as sin in a another part of the Bible and he lumped it in with the sins in Corinthians when asked for examples of fucking sins?

  jmog;1555954 wrote:Correct, especially since that passage more deals with different sexual sins than the 'rest' like murder, etc.

  queencitybuckeye;1555961 wrote:Possible, I'm just saying it isn't a "top of mind" sin if one were to contemporaneously call out a short list of sins.

  I like to go with the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). It doesn't use "bestiality" either. But, I also don't just pick out one word out of Phil's statements and get in an uproar over it.
  

  Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers--none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.

  We also have to remember that there is context to the scriptures too. There may (or may not) have been a Greek word (its original written language) for "bestality." I don't know my Greek well enough to say. Regardless of that, there was no comparison between homosexuals and anyone in the Phil-quote. Nor were there any comparisons in the Biblical text. I also try not to pick out a single verse (especially in these Pauline letters) and base a thought on them. Phil doesn't either. He spoke of the love before he spoke of the sin. The immediate verse that follows Phil's paraphrase is the most important of the verses:
  

  And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

• Devils Advocate

  

  Heretic;1555975 wrote:And this is why we have the Flying Spaghetti Monster!

  Shhhh... The Pastafarians are notoriosly selfish and would not want the worls at large to share in the universal truth of the FSM.
• gut

  Tiernan;1555916 wrote:Openly Gay couple on A&Es "Storage Wars" claim anus's are tighter than vaginas. Kinduva reality show "STFU Phil".

  Must be God's fault for giving them small penises.
• Dr Winston O'Boogie

  

  Maybe it's been covered in thie thread already, but I think thiis whole thing is a publicity grab. Who cares what this guy thinks about gays and who cares what gay people think of him. Sometimes I can't get over how our media and, by extension, the rest of us go along like sheep from topic to topic without asking "how did we get here?" Does this guy from the swamp's opinion deserve one second more's consideration than my mailman's? And the usual suspect of people who line up to condemn anything in the world they find offensive - do any of us really care what they have to say on a topic. They're offended by everything, so just assume they're upset about whatever it is being discussed.
• isadore

  jmog;1555917 wrote:He didn't mine the Bible, and you have no idea what you are talking about with respect to shellfish or pork. Those are Jewish only rules, not Christian.
  
  He gave a list (not all encompassing mind you) of things he considered sin.
  
  You completely missed the part of the article where he said he loved everyone, where he would never treat anyone any different because of how they chose to live, and he left 'that' up to God.

  a list as you pointed out from First Corinthians that he purposely added to in the most hateful of ways in order to degrade gay people, putting their human acts on the same level as bestiality.
• queencitybuckeye

  OSH;1555983 wrote:I also try not to pick out a single verse (especially in these Pauline letters) and base a thought on them.

  Fair enough, I'll just mention that it was two people from your "side" who did and not me. It was more of a curiosity thing at this point (i.e. "where the hell did he pull that one from?"). Moving on...
  
  Edit: and I apologize for being the one to prompt isadore to crawl out from under his rock this time.
• isadore

  jmog;1555913 wrote:When asked to list what someone believes to be wrong or sin, nothing in the given list is seen as "equal" in the normal English language.
  
  For instance, if someone asked me what types of things morally wrong I might give a list like this:
  
  Lying, cheating on taxes, murder, adultery, etc.
  
  Me giving a list does NOT equate lying with murder, but in your liberal logic it does.
  
  He was asked a question, what does he consider sinful, and he gave a list. That is all he did. He did NOT say homosexuality was equal to beastiality.
  
  Anyone who can understand the basics of the English language can see this.
  
  It is the media that is saying he compared beastiality to homosexuality, anyone who can read and reads the original article/quote knows what he really said.
  
  However, I would never expect isadore to actually read and use logic.

  using a source, First Corinthians and then adding bestiality to it confirms his homophobia.
  Gosh a ruddies
  why did you put quotation marks around "racism" Don't you find his defense of Jim Crow segregation, his claim that blacks were happy and contented under it abhorrent. Or are you giving your implied support for his stand?
• Heretic

  

  queencitybuckeye;1555993 wrote:Fair enough, I'll just mentioned that it was two people from your "side" who did and not me. It was more of a curiosity thing at this point (i.e. "where the hell did he pull that one from?"). Moving on...
  
  Edit: and I apologize for being the one to prompt isadore to crawl out from under his rock this time.

  If there's a reason for Justin to make negs site-wide, prompting isadore is it!
• se-alum

  

  This has been a surprisingly good debate for the most part.
• GoPens

  

  Heretic;1555841 wrote:Or at least, it's pretty damn comedic. Reminds me of our political board: A lot of 10-cent minds thinking they know the answers to complicated issues when all they're really doing is spouting buzzwords with no real knowledge of what they mean.

  This times infinity.
• dlazz

  se-alum;1556012 wrote:This has been a surprisingly good debate for the most part.

  Until isadore showed up
• jmog

  dlazz;1556020 wrote:Until isadore showed up

  QFT and reps.
• like_that

  

  
• Manhattan Buckeye

  One of these days, I'll be tired of being correct all of the time. The backlash is on (even if it is staged!).
• isadore

  Gosh a ruddies about Robertson rancid homophobic and racist rave.
  First Corinthians verse 6 through 11
  
  But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.
  7
  Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?
  8
  Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.
  9
  Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
  10
  Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
  11
  And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
  [URL="file://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&key=0684ce2837c054d34aab4a7a8850c3ac&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ohiochatter.com%2Fforum%2Fshowthread.php%3F43324-Duck-Dynasty-will-Phil-s-interview-doom-the-show%2Fpage13&v=1&libId=4cd830ec-12be-48ff-adf3-5fb51da42853&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.kingjamesbibleonline.org%2F1-Corinthians-Chapter-6%2F&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ohiochatter.com%2Fforum%2Fshowthread.php%3F43324-Duck-Dynasty-will-Phil-s-interview-doom-the-show%2Fpage14&title=Duck%20Dynasty%2C%20will%20Phil's%20interview%20doom%20the%20show%3F%20-%20Page%2013&txt=%3Cu%3E%3Cfont%20color%3D%22%230000ff%22%3Ehttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.kingjamesbibleonline.org%2F1-Corinthians-Chapter-6%2F%3C%2Ffont%3E%3C%2Fu%3E&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_138758747428811"]http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1-Corinthians-Chapter-6/[/URL]
  The obvious source for
  　Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”
  
  Read More
  http://www.gq.com/entertainment/television/201401/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson#ixzz2o4DXHsLH
  
  But obviously his hatred of homosexuals caused him to add bestiality.
  As his blatant racism lead him to trumpet his endorsement of the good old days of Jim Crow.
  　
  
• I Wear Pants

  Manhattan Buckeye;1556043 wrote:One of these days, I'll be tired of being correct all of the time. The backlash is on (even if it is staged!).

  Shit's staged on both sides.
• pmoney25

  

  jmog;1555935 wrote:If I hear one more person bring up "Well why don't Christians adhere to the Levitical Laws then" crap I'm going to scream .
  
  That's about as smart as people who say "Well, people in the Bible had multiple wives, so the Bible is ok with having multiple wives". No, there are MANY historical parts of the Bible that are ONLY recording what happened at that time (maybe for a good moral reason like 'see, don't do this'). They are not there to say "this is what God is ok with and what he is not ok with" they are just recording what happened.
  
  
  Leviticus is one of these books.
  
  If you really want to know what the Bible says Christians should be doing and not be doing, I suggest you get a 'red letter' edition and read the things in red between Matthew and Acts. That's about it.

  Which books make up the Holy Bible? Which are the word of God and which are the word of man? Is the whole Old Testament worthless or just parts of it?
  
  I know Leviticus and what it implies. I also know the Bible that is used today has been changed from the original texts so there are multiple things (concept of Hell) that have either been added or changed.
  
  I also am pretty sure Jesus doesn't say anything about homosexuals. So you have Leviticus and people writing the bible using their laws at the time condemning homosexuals, not the word of God.
• Bio-Hazzzzard

  

  isadore;1556050 wrote:
  
  But obviously his hatred of homosexuals caused him to add bestiality.
  
  　
  

  So you can stereotype him as a hater simply because homosexuality and the desire to screw an animal are perspectively equal in with what he chooses to believe in? Phil has the same right to stand up for himself and for what he believes in equally to that of a homosexual.
  
  You seem to be more of a hater than him simply because you cannot accept his beliefs, sounds fair, doesn't it?
• jmog

  pmoney25;1556063 wrote:Which books make up the Holy Bible? Which are the word of God and which are the word of man? Is the whole Old Testament worthless or just parts of it?
  
  I know Leviticus and what it implies. I also know the Bible that is used today has been changed from the original texts so there are multiple things (concept of Hell) that have either been added or changed.
  
  I also am pretty sure Jesus doesn't say anything about homosexuals. So you have Leviticus and people writing the bible using their laws at the time condemning homosexuals, not the word of God.

  Jesus did refer to sexuality. He first talks about marriage only being between a man and a woman as God designed it in Mathew b
  
  he also talks about the "sins" of the Sodomites being their downfall in 3 of the 4 gospels. If one reads the story of Sodom and Gomorrah it is quite obvious what the sins of the Sodomites are.
  
  
  So you are incorrect. He does reference the sin of homosexuality, he just never said that exact word.
• I Wear Pants

  Bio-Hazzzzard;1556064 wrote:So you can stereotype him as a hater simply because homosexuality and the desire to screw an animal are perspectively equal in with what he chooses to believe in? Phil has the same right to stand up for himself and for what he believes in equally to that of a homosexual.
  
  You seem to be more of a hater than him simply because you cannot accept his beliefs, sounds fair, doesn't it?

  "First they say, 'There is no God. Get him out of your mind,'"
  
  "Then they bow down to birds, animals and reptiles, and each other. And the first thing you see coming out of them is gross sexual immorality. They will dishonor their bodies with one another, degrade each other. Uh, is that going on in the United States of America? Look around. God's not there... And boy is there some immorality going on around here. Does it get worse?"
  
  "Women with women, men with men, they committed indecent acts with one another, and they received in themselves the due penalty for their perversions,"
  
  "They're full of murder, envy, strife, hatred. They are insolent, arrogant, God-haters. They are heartless, they are faithless, they are senseless, they are ruthless. They invent ways of doing evil. That's what you have 235 years, roughly, after your forefathers founded the country. So what are you gonna do Pennsylvania? Just run with them? You're doing to die. Don't forget that."
  
  
  Does that count as being a "hater"?
  
  Also, can we all stop beating this very much dead horse? Dude may or may not have said some asshole things depending on one's viewpoint and his company decided to suspend or fire him. There's not a story here. Let's go back to heating things up in skillets and talking about Fab4runner's vacation or something.
  
  TL;DR: Can we shut up about this on both sides so isadore goes away again?
• isadore

  Bio-Hazzzzard;1556064 wrote:So you can stereotype him as a hater simply because homosexuality and the desire to screw an animal are perspectively equal in with what he chooses to believe in? Phil has the same right to stand up for himself and for what he believes in equally to that of a homosexual.
  
  You seem to be more of a hater than him simply because you cannot accept his beliefs, sounds fair, doesn't it?

  He equates homosexuality and bestiality. That is hateful. He speaks sympathetically of the Jim Crow system and hides its deep injustice and violence. That is hateful. Now gays, blacks and others condemn him for these statements. And you sympathize and defend him with his despicable stated opinions.
• pmoney25

  

  jmog;1556078 wrote:Jesus did refer to sexuality. He first talks about marriage only being between a man and a woman as God designed it in Mathew b
  
  he also talks about the "sins" of the Sodomites being their downfall in 3 of the 4 gospels. If one reads the story of Sodom and Gomorrah it is quite obvious what the sins of the Sodomites are.
  
  
  So you are incorrect. He does reference the sin of homosexuality, he just never said that exact word.

  That they wanted to gang rape a couple of angels? Would he have done the same thing if they wanted to gang rape women or let that slide since it was a woman?
• pmoney25

  

  As for the marriage thing. I'm fine with Religion believing that and even denying to marry same sex people. The marriage debate is if it is ok for the Government to do so. Forget the fact the government shouldn't be in that business anyway.
  
  Millions of people are married without ever stepping inside a church.
• gut

  You can't be the party of victimization without seizing every opportunity to play the part.
• sherm03

  

  jmog;1556078 wrote:Jesus did refer to sexuality. He first talks about marriage only being between a man and a woman as God designed it in Mathew b
  
  he also talks about the "sins" of the Sodomites being their downfall in 3 of the 4 gospels. If one reads the story of Sodom and Gomorrah it is quite obvious what the sins of the Sodomites are.
  
  
  So you are incorrect. He does reference the sin of homosexuality, he just never said that exact word.

  Sorry, but you are dead wrong. I, admittedly, have not been to church in a few years...and I've gotten pretty far away from my faith (my own questions and the practices of the Catholic Church led me away). But I went to Catholic schools literally my entire life...Kindergarten through the 2.5 years of college I completed. I've had plenty of classes on the bible. There is no mention of homosexuality in any of the four gospels or in the book of Acts.
  
  The passage that you're referring to in 3/4 Gospels is similar to this one found in Matthew (11:23-24):

  23 And thou, Capernaum, shalt thou be exalted unto heaven? thou shalt go down unto Hades: for if the mighty works had been done in Sodom which were done in thee, it would have remained until this day. 24 But I say unto you that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.

  That passage doesn't say that the sins of the Sodomites were their downfall. That says that if the works that were being done in Capernaum were done in Sodom, there wouldn't have been a downfall and that the Sodomites will be judged better than those that are not following Jesus.
  
  As for your other point about Jesus referring to sexuality, you're dead wrong again. Don't cherry pick the one line, read the context surrounding it (Matthew 19:1-9):

  3And there came unto him Pharisees, trying him, and saying, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? 4And he answered and said, Have ye not read, that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, 5and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh? 6So that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. 7They say unto him, Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorcement, and to put her away? 8He saith unto them, Moses for your hardness of heart suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it hath not been so. 9And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that marrieth her when she is put away committeth adultery.

  It's about divorce...not about sexuality. Good try, though.
  
  
  Anyone that says that Jesus spoke against homosexuality of completely full of shit.