Yes, he listened to her after she said that she was a dog and could have the scraps from the table of her betters. Jesus Christ: racist pig.
What about the bit where Christ gets his feet washed rather than helping out the poor? After all, the poor are always going to be poor, right? Jesus Christ: Liberal voter.
you are happy to endorse my christianity as long as it is essentially mediated by an independent, rational morality of my own...
Pretty much, yes. Only because the morality of Christianity is so fucking awful, you understand.
Which you seem to understand, given that you used the phrase (which I really like!) 'horrors of the bible.'
...it would be stretching it a bit to ask god to put in a few verses about how great it is to be gay...
Really? Is it really asking to much of a 'perfect, loving God' to not include quotes which will lead to thousands of deaths and a continuing pogrom of hatred and murder? Would it really have been too much to ask God to just say what he meant rather than hinting at things? Would it really have been too much for Jesus to have a quiet word with his disciples and say "No, brothers, love is the most important thing. Yea, whether it be between a man and a man, a woman and a woman or a man and a woman. Do not let thy personal distaste affect thy words; preach not the evils of love between men."
Because if he'd said that -just once- then maybe people wouldn't be able to quote from that nasty letter to justify homophobia.
Maybe he could have said, "Oh people! Let it be known that God thinks women are neat; yea, let them be teachers amongst you: even of the holy Scripture!" Because then we could have women priests.
Etcetera.
I do not think it would have been too much to ask, no. Sure, no-one would have listened. His messenger-son would have been crucified...OH WAIT. THAT HAPPENED ANYWAY. Indeed, that was the point! And then people would have had the messages already there when the morality got around to looking at them.
I'd still have issues with religion -I have so many!- but it would be one less argument that could be made.
no subject
What about the bit where Christ gets his feet washed rather than helping out the poor? After all, the poor are always going to be poor, right? Jesus Christ: Liberal voter.
Pretty much, yes. Only because the morality of Christianity is so fucking awful, you understand.
Which you seem to understand, given that you used the phrase (which I really like!) 'horrors of the bible.'
Really? Is it really asking to much of a 'perfect, loving God' to not include quotes which will lead to thousands of deaths and a continuing pogrom of hatred and murder? Would it really have been too much to ask God to just say what he meant rather than hinting at things? Would it really have been too much for Jesus to have a quiet word with his disciples and say "No, brothers, love is the most important thing. Yea, whether it be between a man and a man, a woman and a woman or a man and a woman. Do not let thy personal distaste affect thy words; preach not the evils of love between men."
Because if he'd said that -just once- then maybe people wouldn't be able to quote from that nasty letter to justify homophobia.
Maybe he could have said, "Oh people! Let it be known that God thinks women are neat; yea, let them be teachers amongst you: even of the holy Scripture!" Because then we could have women priests.
Etcetera.
I do not think it would have been too much to ask, no. Sure, no-one would have listened. His messenger-son would have been crucified...OH WAIT. THAT HAPPENED ANYWAY. Indeed, that was the point! And then people would have had the messages already there when the morality got around to looking at them.
I'd still have issues with religion -I have so many!- but it would be one less argument that could be made.