How Homosexuality harms Civilizations, Ibn Khaldun

submitted by EternalSunset from youtu.be

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Vulptex 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

I know I sound crazy, but this is why I've predicted the religious "new right" (European definition) will soon renounce Christianity and convert to Islam en masse. Islam fits their new values much better than a religion that says to love everyone and forbids tyranny.

[–]WhenImBanned 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

I'm Muslim already and the reason why people are abandoning Christianity is because Christianity has no set in stone rules to protect itself. Ask any Christian about the so called violent verses of the Bible they'll just say "OH WE DONT FOLLOW THAT HEHE" or "uWu Those were valid then nothing in the Bible is valid now! It doesn't matter what the Bible says!" So Christianity has become inconsistent. The scripture has become irrelevant. What kinda religion is that?

And who do they see fighting jihad to repel the degeneracy? It's only Muslims. They only fear Muslims because you can't beat them via democracy but Muslims don't play by democracy or any man-made law. They tried Guantanamo, they tried predator drones, they tried mass murder, Muslims did not give up their faith whereas Christians have already bent the knee because they fear being cancelled on Twitter.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

The New Testament does not interpret the old literally, nor does it believe it to be infallible or untampered with through the ages. Christians have since lost sight of this which of course lead to massive contradictions.

Christianity is losing traction because it opposes the evil nature of the world, and of course human nature along with it.

[–]WhenImBanned 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Christianity has it's own jihad prescribed in the books. "Turn the other cheek" when attacked was never the way of the prophets. And that's not a bad thing. War is necessary to end oppression. This is why the people now are being cucked by thinking they will change anything by protesting and holding up signs.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Wasn't Christianity designed for heterogeneous societies? Isn't it quite natural that homogenous cavemen religions lash out violently when their belief systems are challenged? Don't those with anti-american agenda just seethe when they hear black people reading the Gospel of our Lord on the radio every Sunday morning?

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The Old Testament has instances of turning the other cheek. Think about being enslaved in Egypt for 400 years. Eventually there was a breaking point where it's forced to end, but it goes on for a very long time.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Also remember, the prophets are not all literal either, nor are they free from scribal corruption.

[–]WhenImBanned 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Wdym? If we can't take the words of the Prophets as literal or their very apparent meanings (unless OBVIOUS symbology is used) then what kind of guidance would that be? If someone could interpret it to mean anything then there is no meaning in it. The revelation sent by God is not a riddle, it's sent to give clear guidance.

The first lie the Jews told the Christians was the lie that the revelation is symbolic. When God says "if man layeth with another men" both of them should be killed etc they say "oh that's symbolic" HOW? This is how they distorted Christianity.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Jesus spoke of the mysteries and how the stuff-necked and closed-minded have not been given the ability to know them.

With regard to your final example: much of the "law" is a mixture of religious traditions and man-made laws and temple practices. Some of it is plain, some of it is mysterious, some of it is bad, and some of it is fraudulent. So no one is saying every single law has to be entirely symbolic. That law in particular is intentionally mistranslated, replacing the words "a woman's lyings" with "as with a woman"; concealing the only two real viable meanings: banning either butt sex or sex with a married man (recall how "uncovering someone's nakedness" refers to sexual relations with their spouse). And that entire chapter is an altered version of the original, which was also included in the book, chapter 18, and it says nothing about putting people to death.