Posts Tagged ‘bible’

If we accept the premise as laid down in the Christian Bible about the birth of Jesus, then I have a question.

The child Jesus was not the product of both parents within the legal marriage.

Mary was (supposedly) married to Joseph, but Joseph was not Jesus’ father.

Mary was not legally married to god, who is reported to be the father… therefore –

Was Jesus a bastard?

Read Full Post »

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, like other Catholic clergymen before him, has blamed homosexuality for the current child abuse.

The Pope has blamed modern society for the abuses

Homosexuality? Modern society?

Could clerical child abuse be among the church’s oldest ‘acts’?

The Didache, possibly the oldest known instruction to Church officials, says  they should not to seduce boys. This document dates back to about 100 AD. Clerical chaild abuse appears to have been an issue over 1900 years ago.

Canon 71 from the Council of Elvira – 309AD – says that clerics who sexually abuse young boys should be expelled from the church. Clearly clerical child abuse was a big issue in the 4th century… why else mention it?

While it is possible that most or all the books of the New Testament were first written before 100 AD; the Canon of the 27 books of the New Testament was not accepted or formalised as such until the 3rd Council of Carthage – around 397 AD – Books of the New Testament were first put into chapters in the 13th century, and verses first in the 16th century.

Clerical child abuse is not a new phenomenon – it is as old as the religion itself, which in turn tars all denominations.

If these abusers were not clerics, and their crimes were discovered, they would be arrested, charged, and if found guilty, jailed…. why is it different for clerics of any religion who commit such acts?

Read Full Post »

The greatest threat to the longevity of the human species on planet Earth is not in the granting of equal rights to homosexuals, or in the legal recognition of any kind of human relationship. It is not even how we perceive gender roles to be now or in the future. The greatest threat to the longevity of the human species on a planet with dwindling resources, increasing pollution, and human induced climate change, is unfettered human breeding.

I am not calling for, nor would I endorse, a program of population reduction, or of the goal of zero population growth. I only wish to point out the fallacy in the words of the Pope – someone who is a supporter of unfettered procreation; for it appears he sees the sole purpose of human coupling is procreation, something he encourages at any and every opportunity.

I don’t think people need encouragement to reproduce, they will do it as they will… Granting same sex couples equal rights and dignity will not effect the birth-rate one jot.

The Pope said that The tropical rain forests deserve our protection, this is true, but it is the very thing he is arguing for that is the greatest threat to the rainforests and other wilderness areas around the world. Homosexuality is one of the things least threatening to the longevity of the species; simple mathematics will bare this out.

As the world’s population approaches 7 billion, let use you that number to base things on.

Depending on who you believe, anything from one to ten percent of the population is exclusively homosexual. If you discount the Kinsey report’s 10% mark, and give a conservative estimate, then maybe about 3% of the population is exclusively homosexual. Add to those, those who are bisexual, transsexual, and all manner of people who are not exclusively heterosexual, and for arguments sake, let us assume that 90% of the population at any one time is exclusively heterosexual, and largely capable of reproducing.

Seven billion people, 90% equates to 6,300 million people, 10% equates to 700 million people, think about that… if only one percent of the population that is exclusively homosexual, then there is about 70 million gays in the world right now. World population is anticipated to pass 9 billion soon after the year 2050 (in just over 40 years time).

Homosexuality a threat to human ecology? or is unrestrained heterosexuality and the resulting reproduction the greater threat?

(stats from wikipedia)

Read Full Post »

This drag show has been going for centuries

What is the difference between a Catholic Priest and a Drag Queen?


Read Full Post »

Apologists for the pope are beginning to raise their heads above their oft attacked parapet, claiming that the Pope was misquoted or mis-interpreted or translated.

This argument may on one hand be seen as disingenuous to media outlets who regularly cover the Pope and the Vatican; but on the other hand this argument undercuts the evengelical claim that the bible is the inerrent and infallible word of God.

If people cannot agree on what was said (and meant) in one language less than a week ago, how can we agree on what was said (and meant) up to 3000 years ago in a variety of ancient languages.

In what language did the Pope deliver his speech to the Curia? Was it in Latin, was it in Italian? In both cases whatever the Pope said had to be translated into English and interpreted as to its meaning. Words from one language may not have its exactly meaning counterpart in another, therefore what was meant in one language may have a different meaning after translation into another.

If the speech was delivered in Italian, then a contemporary language needed to be translated into another contemporary language, interpreted as to its meaning, taking into account political and social nuances of the time and publish it. I do not doubt that media commentators who cover the Vatican are aware of the languages used, what words mean, and what the underlying thrust of what is said.

One speech delivered about a week ago, having two translations, resulting in at least two interpretations.

What does that say about a book, some of it written as far back as 3000 years ago, in several ancient languages like Hebrew, Aramaic, Ancient Greek, and Latin, translated and re-translated into language after language through the centuries, given political interpretation after political interpretation through those same centuries, for it to arrive in our time in its various versions… the Bible!!

The inerrant and infallible word of God??

Read Full Post »