օլլի
2.2K posts
@roninmercllc @crash_boondock Shit, that was the funniest thing I experienced in twitter this year
English
@roninmercllc @crash_boondock You are funny. I’m agnostical apatheist born in atheistic country. I don’t even have to read the bible, why should I be mad for “exposure”?
I read it anyway, just to educate myself.
Really, stop talking to voices in your head.
English
this suggests there’s a passage in the Bible that explicitly forbids having sex with roadkill.
Rusty Shackleford@Gr33nOnions
I'm good, that's all you brother
English
@roninmercllc @crash_boondock I really start suspecting that you are talking to ghost in your head, and not to me.
These cultists, are they in the same room with us? Which cult you think I belong to, can you name it?
English
@mightyzucchini @crash_boondock Yes which is a concept you cultists can't understand. The bible has been mistranslated, edited and changed hundreds of times over the years to allow you morons to try to oppress and destroy anyone who calls out your delusions.
English
@roninmercllc @crash_boondock You understand that Bible wasn’t written in English, I hope? I checked before writing a link.
And who is “you cultists”, who are you talking to?
English
@mightyzucchini @crash_boondock The fact that you refuse to acknowledge the point, proves my point. That you cultists don't know or care what is in the bible. You just make shit up and twist things so you can lie and force your delusions onto other people because of how miserable your lives are.
English
@roninmercllc @crash_boondock Whatever man. Don’t know why you anxious to prove that Bible allows men fucking pigs, but whatever
English
@mightyzucchini @crash_boondock It says women not men.
It also says defile, which is only reserved for holy animals as all others are already considered unclean. You can't defile a pig.
Leviticus 18, is about defilement of the spirit not actual physical defilement.
English
@roninmercllc @crash_boondock Nope, Leviticus 18:23 clearly forbids it both for men and women, and doesn’t say anything if the animal is holy. I guess that there might be different translations, but hardly any of them can be read as “only women”
English
@mightyzucchini @crash_boondock Leviticus only forbids WOMEN from having sex with holy animals(those traditionally used for sacrifice) as it sullys a gift meant for God. Men are never mentioned nor other animals.
Roadkill isn't natural causes, but again in that instance its about disease.
English
@AnJa_UwU @crash_boondock “if we use the initial claim that the Christians get the fame for ALL moral developments in Europe”
Well, it’s hard to deny that European moral developments were HEAVILY influenced by Christianity. Not always in a good way though.
English
@mightyzucchini @crash_boondock Ah, but I was told that Jesus made it so that all old books are invalid
Also this would technically be Jewish Morality, not Christian one, if we use the initial claim that the Christians get the fame for ALL moral developments in Europe since the Rome became Christians
English
@AnJa_UwU @crash_boondock Do you mean Jesus made Law of Moses invalid and therefore allowed fucking dead animals?
Jokes aside, I was also told so when was hanging out with Evangelists. But I don’t remember anything in New Testament saying so. Besides, Old Testament is still part of Christian canon
English
@NowImSticky Exactly.
What fascinated me was that there was no understanding of real mechanisms of disease spreading that time, but people were observant enough to see that something bad will happen if you do it. Enforced by religion, yes, but ancient people were not stupid
English
@mightyzucchini Usually when we have to write rules down it's because it's already happened enough for someone to say "alright man, listen.. you can't do that anymore."
English
@crash_boondock Hm, I was actually wrong, these two things were in different sections, one marked as “uncleanness” and another as “perversion”.
Btw it was fascinating to read. While all rules equally God’s law, some violations could be cleansed, like quarantine, and other just “it’s abomination”
English
@crash_boondock Well, if I remember right, Leviticus forbids sex with animals, and also forbids touching animal that died from natural causes (not killed). Both are rather hygienic norms that were explained in religious terms just because there was no separate concept of hygiene at the time
English
@oldnickwhirly Да у меня нет претензий к тому что он мне снится, у меня претензии что он во сне ведет себя как по башке ебанутый
Русский
@mightyzucchini Предлагаю написать ему смс: "Перестаньте мне сниться!" и тут-же заблокировать.
Русский
@RepairOfAmerica @765Tet Also, about “originally there was one” - man, until Council of Nicaea churches didn’t even have single shared set of beliefs, every church leader could interpret things differently. They hardly could agree about nature of Christ, not even talking about canonical list of books
English
@RepairOfAmerica @765Tet > Basically everyone was Catholic for the most part for 1,500 years
As a person born in Russia and now living in Armenia I find it very funny
English
I don't remember needing religion to know why you morally shouldn't stick your dick in a heap of smelly, diseased roadkill.
Rock Solid@ShitpostRock
The best logical fallacy to give an atheist when discussing morals is to ask them why it's morally wrong to have intercourse with roadkill It's dead it will not feel anything, nobody will know and there are no victims If you ask a Christian or Buddhist why it's morally wrong, they will tell you it's because the body retains inherent dignity as part of God's creation (or the sacred flow of life), and desecrating it violates divine/natural order, harms your soul/karma, and shows disrespect, even if no one feels it or knows An atheistic worldview of this question taken to its extreme, concludes that intercourse with roadkill is tantamount to masturbation and nothing more
English