'Duck Dynasty': Phil Robertson anti-gay sermon surfaces

skidadl said:

I didn't mean to sound like I was criticizing. I love many things about how the Catholics roll. In the past I've thrown some bombs but I was just messin with you, ese.

I get what you are saying but scripture gives us direct access to the thrown room of God without hinderence. No mediator is needed. That access comes through the person of Jesus and no other person or institution. It is a deeply personally thing. When you look to a person or intitity to make the way for you then you put your trust in something that can and will fail. I'm not saying that we don't need guidence or help...we certainly do. Ritual, form without relationship and slack of spiritual intimacy are all downfalls of looking to the church for all of the answers rather than seeing God as THE direct source.

The church, which consists of the five fold ministry, excises to equip the saints (that is us) to do the work of the ministry. It's is not a place where we go so someone else can do that and we walk away to our normal lives with no change.

To address the point you made about the time period before scripture was canonized by the holy catholic church (not the Catholic Church) - well yeah, that's true. Now we have scripture to be our guide. We can search it, understand it, memorize it and love by it without the help of another. To give an institution carte blanche is risky business.

Click to expand...

Considering the Bible was written by man, wouldn't the writer of the specific book you're referencing at the time be the mediator?

I wish me, Ed, Kareem and Skid could sit around having beers talking religion. It's nice to get to talk to people that aren't so absolute in their beliefs that won't at lease listen openmindedly to the questions that an agnostic struggles with. Even if those answers end up with an eye roll and a snicker. And Ed and I are open enough to sharing our beliefs without worrying about being judged and snickered back at.

/gaypost

Deuce said:

Considering the Bible was written by man, wouldn't the writer of the specific book you're referencing at the time be the mediator?

Click to expand...

They were written by the hand of God, bruh.

Sorry, that was snarky. Maybe God will forgive me.

Iamtdg said:

I wish me, Ed, Kareem and Skid could sit around having beers talking religion. It's nice to get to talk to people that aren't so absolute in their beliefs that won't at lease listen openmindedly to the questions that an agnostic struggles with. Even if those answers end up with an eye roll and a snicker. And Ed and I are open enough to sharing our beliefs without worrying about being judged and snickered back at.

/gaypost

Click to expand...

No doubt. But we should invite Bipo too. It would be like this:

Ed - the reality is, you cannot fully claim to know that God exists...

Skid - not with evidence that is tangible in any sense.

Cotton - exactly! So how can you make your claims? I've studied during my time as a PT. I've seeeeeen the dark side!

Bipo - f you mutherfers! The ten commandments...faggot hating bitches!!! Uh, burn in hell fricktards! Hate bitch fuuuuuuuck!!! ~smashes bottle of whiskey on his head~

Khalid - ~prays the rosary~

Deuce said:

Considering the Bible was written by man, wouldn't the writer of the specific book you're referencing at the time be the mediator?

Click to expand...

No.

Iamtdg said:

I wish me, Ed, Kareem and Skid could sit around having beers talking religion. It's nice to get to talk to people that aren't so absolute in their beliefs that won't at lease listen openmindedly to the questions that an agnostic struggles with. Even if those answers end up with an eye roll and a snicker. And Ed and I are open enough to sharing our beliefs without worrying about being judged and snickered back at.

/gaypost

Click to expand...

Those that are so-called solid in our religion have our struggles to. Christianinty is not a magical solution to the problems of humanity. Struggling and wrestling with questions about life and belief does not end on the day of conversion.

The thing about you is that I feel more of a kindredness based on the fact that you know a lot of what I'm talking about most of the time

skidadl said:

No doubt. But we should invite Bipo too. It would be like this:

Ed - the reality is, you cannot fully claim to know that God exists...

Skid - not with evidence that is tangible in any sense.

Cotton - exactly! So how can you make your claims? I've studied during my time as a PT. I've seeeeeen the dark side!

Bipo - f you mutherfers! The ten commandments...faggot hating bitches!!! Uh, burn in hell fricktards! Hate bitch fuuuuuuuck!!! ~smashes bottle of whiskey on his head~

Khalid - ~prays the rosary~

Click to expand...

That's exactly how I see it going down.

Ed, I wish I could better articulate good answers for you. Your questions deserve good answers and I feel like I'm failing you. Basically, it is deeply personal.

skidadl said:

Those that are so-called solid in our religion have our struggles to. Christianinty is not a magical solution to the problems of humanity. Struggling and wrestling with questions about life and belief does not end on the day of conversion.

The thing about you is that I feel more of a kindredness based on the fact that you know a lot of what I'm talking about most of the time

Click to expand...

Well, as you stated above, I have seen the dark side.

L.T. Fan said:

I know. But you know me. I adore zingers.

Click to expand...

So do most of these fat bastards.

HEYOOOO!!!

skidadl said:

I didn't mean to sound like I was criticizing. I love many things about how the Catholics roll. In the past I've thrown some bombs but I was just messin with you, ese.

I get what you are saying but scripture gives us direct access to the thrown room of God without hinderence. No mediator is needed. That access comes through the person of Jesus and no other person or institution. It is a deeply personally thing. When you look to a person or intitity to make the way for you then you put your trust in something that can and will fail. I'm not saying that we don't need guidence or help...we certainly do. Ritual form without relationship and slack of spiritual intimacy are all downfalls of looking to the church for all of the answers rather than seeing God as THE direct source.

The church, which consists of the five fold ministry, excises to equip the saints (that is us) to do the work of the ministry. It's is not a place where we go so someone else can do that and we walk away to our normal lives with no change.

To address the point you made about the time period before scripture was canonized by the holy catholic church (not the Catholic Church) - well yeah, that's true. Now we have scripture to be our guide. We can search it, understand it, memorize it and love by it without the help of another. To give an institution carte blanche is risky business.

Click to expand...

No disclaimer necessary, buddy.

I do think some of your ideas here are based on a few common incorrect assumptions.

The most significant (and really the basis of all protestantism, I think) is that mediator=obstacle. The Church's authority rests on the Incarnation--that, by His becoming flesh, God has redeemed the physical world. Therefore, we have a physical Church that, while imperfect in some of its indvidual human failures, is guided by the Holy Spirit. The Incarnation is also at the root of sacramentality, the union of physical things (water in baptism, sex in marriage, the Eucharist in Communion). I grew up my entire childhood hearing the same protestant refrain that those poor misguided Catholics NEED a priest to talk to God for them, but don't they know the veil was rent and we can approach the Throne?? It wasn't till I made my first confession that I fully understood: the veil was not the mediating priest. The veil was my limited senses and the disconnect between God and the physical world. Now I can confess my sins and know that I am forgiven when I hear physical voice empowered by God through Peter and his apostolic authority tell me that I am absolved. Not by Fr. So-and-so or Pope Francis' merits, but solely by Jesus Christ's.

I think the other assumption is just the old Reformation conceit that the Bible is self-evident and the wicked old worldly Church tries to keep people from learning for themselves. Also incorrect. The Church's teaching merely sets bounds on what can or cannot be concluded from Scripture. The idea that it has carte blanche is, again, a Reformation conceit. I think it is necessary to have an institution which, guided by the Spirit, has spent thousands of years debating, clarifying, and explaining the Scriptures.

Otherwise, we have what we have in Protestant churches: exponential development of denominational fragments that split from one another over grievances pertaining to Scriptural interpretation. That's not to mention the various nutballs, wackos and outsiders have been able to find basis for their beliefs by warping the Bible into whatever they want and taking Scriptures out of their socio-cultural, historical and theological contexts. I, for one, don't feel entirely qualified to interpret texts which, at the time of their writing, were written to various ends. Martin Luther, the chief reformer and architect of sola scripura (which isn't found in Scripture, incidentallly) apparently found scriptural support for devotion to Mary. But now the idea is that there is no Biblical basis for it and it is all a pagan sham by the Catholic Church. Not so self-evident, I think.

Bottom line is that the idea the Church and its ministers and Sacraments are an impediment to intimacy with God is flatly false. Quite the opposite. There wasn't any impediment quite like listening to various preachers take scriptures out of context while I was growing up. I didn't know real intimacy until I converted. I am actually in a bit of a wilderness right now, but I know the Church will be there for me when God gives me the strength to right the ship. It's a good feeling.

I fully realize I am operating under my own assumptions, but therein lies the separation, eh?

Good stuff Khalid. I think that you made some leaps about my beliefs based on what you commonly hear from folks like me. Some of them true and others are not.

I deeply respect and listen to what my catholic brothers have to say. There are some really good things worth investigating on both sides, IMO. Some of those I certainly have. Matter of fact, my family is going to mass from 10pm-midnight tonight.

I think where we differ is that you look to the historical Catholic Church for guidence and comfort and I look to the first and second century church for the same.

What happened to the topic? The quacker guy.

You wanta talk ducks, LT?

Noting to see there. Simply more of the cultural war going on in the country.

Prolly some truth to EZs idea on ratings boost.

No idea.

I respect people who can commit to a faith. It takes a great deal of conviction that I just don't have. Most people are cool about whatever they believe. It's the minority that think they have the right to impose their beliefs on anyone else that are the problem. You think homosexuals are sinners? That's fine. It also has nothing to do with you unless you are gay. Most people are perfectly capable of having this kind of rational discussion of differing viewpoints.

Personally I think this guys comments were calculated to causes a controversy right as Christmas sales were in full swing. These guys know what happened last year with Chik-fil-a, and if nothing else are geniuses at marketing themselves. It's a net win for his family, A&E, and GQ. To me, Christians should have more of a problem with this blatant exploitation of their faith than anyone else.

Dallen, I'm not sure that the old man was trying to turn this into a money deal. Not sayingnhebdid or didn't. I just wouldn't be surprised that a lot of this had something to do with that by whoever the source was.

dallen said:

I respect people who can commit to a faith. It takes a great deal of conviction that I just don't have. Most people are cool about whatever they believe. It's the minority that think they have the right to impose their beliefs on anyone else that are the problem. You think homosexuals are sinners? That's fine. It also has nothing to do with you unless you are gay. Most people are perfectly capable of having this kind of rational discussion of differing viewpoints.

Personally I think this guys comments were calculated to causes a controversy right as Christmas sales were in full swing. These guys know what happened last year with Chik-fil-a, and if nothing else are geniuses at marketing themselves. It's a net win for his family, A&E, and GQ. To me, Christians should have more of a problem with this blatant exploitation of their faith than anyone else.

Click to expand...

Well of course homosexuals are sinners. Indeed we all are sinners. We are conceived and born in sin. The isn't one person who alive except sinners. That concept eludes most people. The difference is some believe they have been redeemed and as a result have accepted a plan and way of life toward that end. The thing that makes some of the redeemed come across as unbearable is that they become finger pointers rather than beacons. But yes we are all sinners at birth.

That's where the difference lies, LT. I don't think "of course" fags are sinners. It may be your opinion that they are, but the of course thing bothers me. I could say of course Christians are judgmental assholes but that's not necessarily true.

EDIT: Unless you're saying that gays are sinners by just being human and not specifically for being gay. If that's the case I retract the statement above.

skidadl said:

Ed, I wish I could better articulate good answers for you. Your questions deserve good answers and I feel like I'm failing you. Basically, it is deeply personal.

Click to expand...

No, I appreciate you giving your take. Just uber busy getting last minute stuff done in preparation for tomorrow so no time to really give it the necessary thought/response right now.

Iamtdg said:

That's where the difference lies, LT. I don't think "of course" fags are sinners. It may be your opinion that they are, but the of course thing bothers me. I could say of course Christians are judgmental assholes but that's not necessarily true.

EDIT: Unless you're saying that gays are sinners by just being human and not specifically for being gay. If that's the case I retract the statement above.

Click to expand...

He did say everyone was a sinner.