8 more people that Phil Robertson would like to love and give the good news about Jesus:

Search

NES

Member
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
16,979
Tokens
I don't really have an opinion either way but what quote makes you feel he is?

Mostly his skewed view on pre civil rights blacks based upon a couple quotes I read. Did he consider they didn't run their mouths about "dem doggone whites" because they were afraid of getting strung up and he was just a stupid kid and didnt realize it. He should have realized it by now.

I think everyone has their right to freedom of speech but this guy should not be anyone's religious poster boy and no one should be shocked he got fired. Having said this I think it is all a rating scam and it's working. The sickest part is that their whole image is a sham, look at some before and after shots they are playing the southerners for fools.
 

Member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
39,461
Tokens
Mostly his skewed view on pre civil rights blacks based upon a couple quotes I read. Did he consider they didn't run their mouths about "dem doggone whites" because they were afraid of getting strung up and he was just a stupid kid and didnt realize it. He should have realized it by now.

I think everyone has their right to freedom of speech but this guy should not be anyone's religious poster boy and no one should be shocked he got fired. Having said this I think it is all a rating scam and it's working. The sickest part is that their whole image is a sham, look at some before and after shots they are playing the southerners for fools.

I'm not shocked at all he got fired and I think A&E made a sound business decision. But...what he said is an opinion shared by millions of Americans. He was asked what he thought was a sin and he said "homosexuality." I don't see why that makes him wrong or a bigot.
 

NES

Member
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
16,979
Tokens
Can you politely address what I asked in post #32? Did he call anyone a fag? If not, why did you say that?

I use it as an endearing term. i.e. "fags throw the best parties". One of my best friends is a "you know what" so I have a little street cred.
 

NES

Member
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
16,979
Tokens
I'm not shocked at all he got fired and I think A&E made a sound business decision. But...what he said is an opinion shared by millions of Americans. He was asked what he thought was a sin and he said "homosexuality." I don't see why that makes him wrong or a bigot.

He is a bigot because of the pre civil rights quote I mentioned previously, and yes he agrees with with millions of ass backwards americans. Either you live by it or you dont, you cant pick and choose parts that allow to press your holier than thou opinions. I mean you can, many people do, Im just saying it sucks and shame and you(the proverbial you) for using the bible to judge homosexuals(much longer to type out) in a different light than you do other sins because its convenient for you(the proverbial "you). Once again I challenge anyone to correctly interpret my original post here, I think the majority is cut and dry, excuse me for not being the court chaplin. Also would appreciate any quotes by Jesus regarding the sin of homosexuality.
 

Member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
39,461
Tokens
I use it as an endearing term. i.e. "fags throw the best parties". One of my best friends is a "you know what" so I have a little street cred.

Well, in post #21 you said Phil Robertson used the term "fags" which he actually didn't do.

I think if you're going to argue against his quotes and call him a bigot, you should at least be accurate right?
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,847
Tokens
I invite any one of you Bible scholars to correctly interpret the sections I posted for us poor unfortunate souls that don't truly understand the Bible as you do.

I'll interpret any of them, where would you like me to start.

Typically ignorant folks like you cite some dietary law from the Mosaic Law, which was a temporary law that has no significance to people today,
nor to the New Testament Christians 2,000 years ago. Funny how donks never cite the other parts of the New Testament that condemned
homosexuality.

I'll also cite where Jesus condemned it also. As per your request.

Is that good? Where would you like me to start, not that I think you'll even take it remotely seriously.

Fact is, you know very little about what you are talking about. Clue: living in the Bible Belt doesn't make you educated, nor intelligent.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,847
Tokens
NES, you're also lying about what Robertson said - and you're not even willing to do the little amount of research it takes to verify the trash
you are posting about him that's not true.

Dumb ass.
 

Member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
39,461
Tokens
He is a bigot because of the pre civil rights quote I mentioned previously, and yes he agrees with with millions of ass backwards americans. Either you live by it or you dont, you cant pick and choose parts that allow to press your holier than thou opinions. I mean you can, many people do, Im just saying it sucks and shame and you(the proverbial you) for using the bible to judge homosexuals(much longer to type out) in a different light than you do other sins because its convenient for you(the proverbial "you). Once again I challenge anyone to correctly interpret my original post here, I think the majority is cut and dry, excuse me for not being the court chaplin. Also would appreciate any quotes by Jesus regarding the sin of homosexuality.

Is it this quote NES? I wasn't familiar with this one.

“I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person," Robertson is quoted in GQ. "Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”
 

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
22,469
Tokens
Once again I challenge anyone to correctly interpret my original post here

waving-elfgif

Your "original post here" is silly.

You do not understand anything about the Bible.

Period. End of discussion.
 

NES

Member
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
16,979
Tokens
Once again I challenge anyone to correctly interpret my original post here

waving-elfgif

Your "original post here" is silly.

You do not understand anything about the Bible.

Period. End of discussion.

So you are incapable, fair enough friend.
 

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
22,469
Tokens
So you are incapable, fair enough friend.

Except I already responded in post #31.

If I knew as little about a topic as you do about the Bible, I'd stop typing.

You won't, however.
 

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
22,469
Tokens
It is beyond comical someone actually believes the Bible suggests you should just go out and kill your children.

But hey, if screeching about some guy on TV you don't know, never met, and who's actual words you never bothered to read makes you feel good inside, knock yourself out.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,847
Tokens
Jesus words on homosexuality:

<!-- Mobile viewport optimized: j.mp/bplateviewport --><noscript><div style="display:none;">< img src="http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-d9XxhfbZ3mYSM.gif" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt="Quantcast"/>< /div> </noscript><noscript>
atrk.gif
</noscript>
So, did Jesus condemn, speak of, or even mention homosexuality? The one who espouses this false teaching usually begins by saying that he discounts both the Old Testament and the writings of Paul and adheres only to the four Gospels. In so doing, they think they have found a convenient way to justify the homosexual lifestyle. First, the gyrations one must use to reach this illogical conclusion are astounding and ought to be the first dead giveaway of the falsehood of the proposition. But, secondly, let’s simply examine the question on its face – did Jesus ever say anything in the four Gospels that would condemn the homosexual lifestyle or homosexual marriage?
As it turns out, yes, He did. As a matter of fact, He spoke very clearly and directly about the issue. Let me begin with Matthew 19:4. Here Jesus is answering a question from the Pharisees regarding divorce. However, his answer is very telling concerning the entire issue of sexuality, the purpose of sexuality, marriage and the proper form of marriage. Here are the words of Jesus:
“And He answered and said to them, ‘Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning “made them male and female,” and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh”?’” (Matthew 19:4)
Here Jesus upholds creation, male and female sexual relationships (in marriage), male and female marriage, procreation as a part of male and female marriage, and the sanctity of male and female marriage and sexual relationships. His answer is a blanket ignoring (thus condemnation as perversion) of anything outside God’s standard for sexuality and marriage. This truth cannot be legitimately explained away.
But, Jesus gets even more direct concerning the issue of homosexuality. In John 5:46-47, Jesus tells his detractors that unless one holds to the writings of Moses (the first five books of the Bible), one cannot fully know or understand truth or Jesus Himself. “For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?” (John 5:46-47) Of course, in the first five books of the Bible we read of the days of Noah and Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis) and the blanket condemnation of homosexuality as perversion (Leviticus). Oh well, so much for throwing out the Old Testament to legitimize homosexuality. But wait – Jesus gets even more direct with the matter.
Jesus also spoke of the destruction of the Sodomite (openly celebrating homosexuality) cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. (Luke 17:28-32; Matthew 10:15; 11:24; Mark 6:11.) The presenting sin that brought about the destruction of those cultures was homosexuality. Consider these words found in the book of Jude:
“Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.” (Jude 1:7-8)
Three of the four gospels contain quotes from Jesus about the sinful condition of Sodom and Gomorrah and the destruction that the celebration of the presenting sin of homosexuality wrought upon them. One of those quotes equates the sins of Sodom (homosexuality) to the same type of pervasive perversion of Noah’s day (Luke 17:26-30). So, as it turns out … YES, Jesus did speak rather forthrightly, and often, about the sin of homosexuality and the judgment that it brings upon societies that celebrate it.
But, most important to the issue is the matter of the person of Jesus. Who is He? Well, He claimed to be God with us. The Scriptures claim that He is God with us (Matthew 1:24). Even his enemies knew that Jesus was making this claim (John 10:33). So, if Jesus is “God with us,” then we have to ask, “Does God condemn homosexuality?” The answer is obvious. From Genesis to Revelation, God’s Word, homosexuality is condemned as perversion and a certain sign that God’s judgment is on the way to the culture that openly celebrates it as “normal.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/did-jesus-condemn-homosexuality/#V00pwBS41iiH4QlB.99
<!-- Begin web tools header --><!-- Quantcast Tag --><!-- End Quantcast tag --><!-- Start Alexa Certify Javascript --><!-- End Alexa Certify Javascript --><!-- end web tools header -->
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,847
Tokens
Ok so explain "put the death", Im pretty sure there isnt much room for interpretation.

There isn't, but that has nothing to do with anyone that isn't living under the Mosaic law, which went away thousands of years ago.

Next...
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
44,317
Tokens
I'll interpret any of them, where would you like me to start.

Typically ignorant folks like you cite some dietary law from the Mosaic Law, which was a temporary law that has no significance to people today,
nor to the New Testament Christians 2,000 years ago. Funny how donks never cite the other parts of the New Testament that condemned
homosexuality.


Jesus words on homosexuality:

<!-- Mobile viewport optimized: j.mp/bplateviewport --><noscript><div style="display:none;">< img src="http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-d9XxhfbZ3mYSM.gif" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt="Quantcast"/>< /div> </noscript><noscript><img src="https://d5nxst8fruw4z.cloudfront.net/atrk.gif?account=V+Hff1asZt008h" border="0" alt="" /></noscript>
So, did Jesus condemn, speak of, or even mention homosexuality? The one who espouses this false teaching usually begins by saying that he discounts both the Old Testament and the writings of Paul and adheres only to the four Gospels. In so doing, they think they have found a convenient way to justify the homosexual lifestyle. First, the gyrations one must use to reach this illogical conclusion are astounding and ought to be the first dead giveaway of the falsehood of the proposition. But, secondly, let’s simply examine the question on its face – did Jesus ever say anything in the four Gospels that would condemn the homosexual lifestyle or homosexual marriage?
As it turns out, yes, He did. As a matter of fact, He spoke very clearly and directly about the issue. Let me begin with Matthew 19:4. Here Jesus is answering a question from the Pharisees regarding divorce. However, his answer is very telling concerning the entire issue of sexuality, the purpose of sexuality, marriage and the proper form of marriage. Here are the words of Jesus:
“And He answered and said to them, ‘Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning “made them male and female,” and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh”?’” (Matthew 19:4)
Here Jesus upholds creation, male and female sexual relationships (in marriage), male and female marriage, procreation as a part of male and female marriage, and the sanctity of male and female marriage and sexual relationships. His answer is a blanket ignoring (thus condemnation as perversion) of anything outside God’s standard for sexuality and marriage. This truth cannot be legitimately explained away.
But, Jesus gets even more direct concerning the issue of homosexuality. In John 5:46-47, Jesus tells his detractors that unless one holds to the writings of Moses (the first five books of the Bible), one cannot fully know or understand truth or Jesus Himself. “For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?” (John 5:46-47) Of course, in the first five books of the Bible we read of the days of Noah and Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis) and the blanket condemnation of homosexuality as perversion (Leviticus). Oh well, so much for throwing out the Old Testament to legitimize homosexuality. But wait – Jesus gets even more direct with the matter.
Jesus also spoke of the destruction of the Sodomite (openly celebrating homosexuality) cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. (Luke 17:28-32; Matthew 10:15; 11:24; Mark 6:11.) The presenting sin that brought about the destruction of those cultures was homosexuality. Consider these words found in the book of Jude:
“Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.” (Jude 1:7-8)
Three of the four gospels contain quotes from Jesus about the sinful condition of Sodom and Gomorrah and the destruction that the celebration of the presenting sin of homosexuality wrought upon them. One of those quotes equates the sins of Sodom (homosexuality) to the same type of pervasive perversion of Noah’s day (Luke 17:26-30). So, as it turns out … YES, Jesus did speak rather forthrightly, and often, about the sin of homosexuality and the judgment that it brings upon societies that celebrate it.
But, most important to the issue is the matter of the person of Jesus. Who is He? Well, He claimed to be God with us. The Scriptures claim that He is God with us (Matthew 1:24). Even his enemies knew that Jesus was making this claim (John 10:33). So, if Jesus is “God with us,” then we have to ask, “Does God condemn homosexuality?” The answer is obvious. From Genesis to Revelation, God’s Word, homosexuality is condemned as perversion and a certain sign that God’s judgment is on the way to the culture that openly celebrates it as “normal.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/did-jesus-condemn-homosexuality/#V00pwBS41iiH4QlB.99
<!-- Begin web tools header --><!-- Quantcast Tag --><!-- End Quantcast tag --><!-- Start Alexa Certify Javascript --><!-- End Alexa Certify Javascript --><!-- end web tools header -->

There isn't, but that has nothing to do with anyone that isn't living under the Mosaic law, which went away thousands of years ago.

Next...


This is a completely separate issue that has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

But what you bring up is something I have been having a real issue with the last few.

The Old Testament vs the New Testament.
I notice a lot of Christians take the harsh stuff from the OT and write it off as old law. Meaning that the Old Testament teachings is nothing more then a history lesson.
That is when its convenient.

Just in this thread alone you have already once said that some of the verses in Leviticus that NES quoted was no longer relevant because it was written under the old law.

But in the very next post you say the opposite quoting a verse from Jesus where he says if you dont hold the teaching of the first 5 books of the Bible one cannot fully know the teachings of Jesus.

How can Leviticus not be relevant in one post, but in the next post you say if you dont hold the teaching of the first 5 books of the Bible you cannot truly know Jesus? Leviticus is the 3rd book of the Bible so all of NES quotes make the cut as far as the first 5 books thing you quoted later that was now relevant when before it was not.


It is a real question I have.
I dont think the God of the Bible is a fairy tale like many do, but I have some serious issues with a great portion of the Old Testament.
I honestly dont know how one person can agree 100% with both the NT and OT because they contradict themselves many times.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,847
Tokens
I'll interpret any of them, where would you like me to start.

Typically ignorant folks like you cite some dietary law from the Mosaic Law, which was a temporary law that has no significance to people today,
nor to the New Testament Christians 2,000 years ago. Funny how donks never cite the other parts of the New Testament that condemned
homosexuality.







This is a completely separate issue that has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

But what you bring up is something I have been having a real issue with the last few.

The Old Testament vs the New Testament.
I notice a lot of Christians take the harsh stuff from the OT and write it off as old law. Meaning that the Old Testament teachings is nothing more then a history lesson.
That is when its convenient.

Just in this thread alone you have already once said that some of the verses in Leviticus that NES quoted was no longer relevant because it was written under the old law.

But in the very next post you say the opposite quoting a verse from Jesus where he says if you dont hold the teaching of the first 5 books of the Bible one cannot fully know the teachings of Jesus.

How can Leviticus not be relevant in one post, but in the next post you say if you dont hold the teaching of the first 5 books of the Bible you cannot truly know Jesus? Leviticus is the 3rd book of the Bible so all of NES quotes make the cut as far as the first 5 books thing you quoted later that was now relevant when before it was not.


It is a real question I have.
I dont think the God of the Bible is a fairy tale like many do, but I have some serious issues with a great portion of the Old Testament.
I honestly dont know how one person can agree 100% with both the NT and OT because they contradict themselves many times.

Good questions Chop, the Jews at the time of Jesus did live under the OT law. But Jesus came to do away with the old covenant. New Testament = new covenant. That's not to say that there is n9 moral law any more but that people don't have to sacrifice animals to absolve themselves of sin. The whole book of Hebrews describes how since Jesus was the perfect sacrifice one time that the old system of anumal sacrifice has been done away with.
 

New member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
668
Tokens
Good questions Chop, the Jews at the time of Jesus did live under the OT law. But Jesus came to do away with the old covenant. New Testament = new covenant. That's not to say that there is n9 moral law any more but that people don't have to sacrifice animals to absolve themselves of sin. The whole book of Hebrews describes how since Jesus was the perfect sacrifice one time that the old system of anumal sacrifice has been done away with.

Chop, the above is a decent explanation for you. I will give you another one....

Many people think that all religions are basically the same. It's the "what do I have to do in order to go to heaven" mentality.
Christianity is different than every other religion is one simple way:

Chistianity is NOT about what YOU can do for God. It is ALL ABOUT what God has done for you.


(John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.)

The New Testament = The New Covenant. Instead of having to do umpteen different things to be worthy, God made it as simple as can be:

Just Believe.

You are correct that the OT and NT contradict on many levels. One can't help but see it if you really look into it. Personally I'd say just stick with the New Testament.

This whole Duck Dynasty thing doesn't smell right to me though. It seems a little too planned but who knows...I think he has every right to say what he wants but A&E also has every right to fire him. The 1st Amendment doesn't guarantee you a job. I think the comments about blacks pre civil rights was pretty weird but whatever. There's a LOT of ignorant people though who believe that freedom of speech means you can say whatever you want and your employer just has to deal with it. NOTHING could be further from the truth.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,109,930
Messages
13,464,259
Members
99,501
Latest member
janerothe
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com