# God hates the fag King James Bible **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 21, 2009, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215 "2009-08-21T16:55:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2009, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/141 "2009-08-26T22:04:04Z")
> [@eleanorigby](#): > > I’m left wondering how a guy could NOT be gay in the times of James I. Just look at the fashions! Hosen and codpieces and ruffs around the neck… and then they started wearing wigs and patches on their faces and velvet coats and such. > I think we should vote the 17 and 18th centuries the Gay Years. When men were men and women were left in peace. 😛 > > And **jsgoddess** is right: there is no place weird in an ordinary way than this place. Well done, all! So maybe then if you were gay you’d have to dress really, really plain? ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2009, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/142 "2009-08-26T22:18:11Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > So maybe then if you were gay you’d have to dress really, really plain? Well, I do think some of those Puritans were deeply closeted, don’t you? Just sayin’. 🙂 (the buckles on the shoes gives them away, every time). ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/143 "2009-08-27T00:11:51Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > The premise that there is a God flies in the face of my own experience. (Subject, of course, to which God you’re talking about. It seems to vary. Lighting isn’t forged by Hephaestus, in my experience…) I am talking about the God Jesus, Son of Yahweh. But you knew that. That’s why I said that faith is a subjective issue rather than an objective issue. Some people believe in God, and some people don’t. Clearly, our premises will differ. But that doesn’t mean we have to treat each other with any sort of disrespect. We should hold each other’s experience to be valid, even though they lead us to separate conclusions. Atheists should not believe that the faithful are delusional, and the faithful should not believe that they have something of a special nature that atheists lack. It is simply a matter of experience. Atheists shouldn’t caricature the Christian God, and then mock the caricature, and Christians shouldn’t caricature atheists as God haters or believers in NoGod. It took me a long time to learn my part of this. You need to learn your part. > [@](#): > > I seem to recall that you don’t believe in the Christian God, who allegedly interfered mightily with the world many times and would have left undismissable evidence behind. That God doesn’t exist. I do believe in the “Christian God”. I believe that Jesus is God. I believe that He died, that His body was buried, and that He rose again on the third day. I believe that He is eternal, essential, and necessary. I believe that the evidence for His existence abounds in everything I sense, and in my own personal experience. I can no more deny His existence than I can my own. That’s what I believe. > [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > I really, sincerely hope you realize that the big black bold letters proclaiming “there is no god” was a joke. It was not an attempt at actually trying to debate the issue of atheism. I was joking about how this thread had turned into a debate about atheism, remember? Oh. Okay. Sorry. Please disregard prior sort of semi-rant slash witness (but not the facts of the content thereof). ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/144 "2009-08-27T00:25:35Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > I am talking about the God Jesus, Son of Yahweh. But you knew that. That’s why I said that faith is a subjective issue rather than an objective issue. Some people believe in God, and some people don’t. Clearly, our premises will differ. But that doesn’t mean we have to treat each other with any sort of disrespect. We should hold each other’s experience to be valid, even though they lead us to separate conclusions. Atheists should not believe that the faithful are delusional, and the faithful should not believe that they have something of a special nature that atheists lack. It is simply a matter of experience. Atheists shouldn’t caricature the Christian God, and then mock the caricature, and Christians shouldn’t caricature atheists as God haters or believers in NoGod. It took me a long time to learn my part of this. You need to learn your part. > > I do believe in the “Christian God”. I believe that Jesus is God. I believe that He died, that His body was buried, and that He rose again on the third day. I believe that He is eternal, essential, and necessary. I believe that the evidence for His existence abounds in everything I sense, and in my own personal experience. I can no more deny His existence than I can my own. That’s what I believe. I honestly thought that you were one of those roll-your-own non-mainstream-religion my-God-is-nothing-like-the-one-you-heard-about-from-the-other-guy theists, like **lekatt**. I apparently got you mixed up with somebody else. I apologize profusely. I hold everyone’s experiences to be as valid as my experience dreaming about the fictional Shirt Tales characters, way back when. (Also, I have no idea what “valid” means in this context. Interpretations can be invalid, by failing to be justified by the evidence. But the experience itself?) Oh, and I caricature the Christian God as the guy who flooded the earth, who ordered his people to take land through slaughter of the current residents, who sent his son (himself?) to die, and who felt that that was justified in some way or accomplished something, who lets volcanoes kill people, ect, ect, ect… Note, of course, that there’s the Christian God, and then on the other hand there is the Christian God. Your Christian God may not be the Christian God I just described, and if not, I am not caricaturing it; I am speaking of a different one with the same name. [/Great Debates] We now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion about gay and/or presumably gay monarchs. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/145 "2009-08-27T00:40:09Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Lighting isn’t forged by Hephaestus, in my experience…) Ha! Shows what you know! Why, here in Appalachia… Wait, wrong thread. ---
**Author:** ![horsetech](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/dec6dc/32.png) [@horsetech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/horsetech)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/146 "2009-08-27T00:57:37Z")
> [@Tapioca\_Dextrin](#): > > I think there’s way too much vitriol in this thread. Seriously. You all need to sit and smoke a fag. Or maybe eat a nice juicy faggot. When everyone has calmed down, we should concentrate on serious matters of Eglish History, such as the 1414 Fire and Faggot Parliament, which gave the right of poundage to Henry V. Poundage, eh? I thought pounding one out was neither straight nor gay. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/147 "2009-08-27T01:56:46Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > I honestly thought that you were one of those roll-your-own non-mainstream-religion my-God-is-nothing-like-the-one-you-heard-about-from-the-other-guy theists, like **lekatt**. I apparently got you mixed up with somebody else. I apologize profusely. No apology necessary. Confusion is not an intention to harm. It is merely a state of mental disarray. > [@](#): > > I hold everyone’s experiences to be as valid as my experience dreaming about the fictional Shirt Tales characters, way back when. (Also, I have no idea what “valid” means in this context. Interpretations can be invalid, by failing to be justified by the evidence. But the experience itself?) I can only tell you what I mean by “valid”. Something (like an argument, for example) is valid if its premises lead reasonably to its conclusion. In other words, as long as something follows some set of rules that compel its conclusion, then it is “valid”. And that is the ordinary meaning of validity in the field of logic. It is interesting to note that all circular arguments (arguments whose conclusions mirror their premises) are valid. But that doesn’t mean that they’re “sound”. Soundness goes to a higher level than validity. To be sound, an argument must be valid AND its premises must be true. And it is on the premises that we disagree. You surely cannot deny my premises, given my experience, but then neither can I expect you to accept my premises, given YOUR experience. And so, it is like a chess game with the pawns on d4, e4, d5, and e5 — there is great tension, but no cause for disrespect from either of us. I cannot accept your premises either. But that doesn’t mean that I deny your experience. (You have not interacted with God.) > [@](#): > > Oh, and I caricature the Christian God as the guy who flooded the earth, who ordered his people to take land through slaughter of the current residents, who sent his son (himself?) to die, and who felt that that was justified in some way or accomplished something, who lets volcanoes kill people, ect, ect, ect… Note, of course, that there’s the Christian God, and then on the other hand there is the Christian God. Your Christian God may not be the Christian God I just described, and if not, I am not caricaturing it; I am speaking of a different one with the same name. Yes, I get that. And I get that you do not understand the hurt that a person of faith feels when His God is mocked — even though you say it is a different God. Our God is our life. Our spirit. More important than our mother. More important than even our own physical selves. It is personally hurtful to hear or see God mocked, much in the manner that it is hurtful for a child to see or hear his mother mocked. But I don’t expect you to understand that. To you, faith is a choice made like a choice of appetizer in a restaurant. There is a menu of Gods, and one chooses one. But it isn’t like that. He chooses us. And if He has not chosen you, then you have to remember that physical life is temporal. You never know what’s around the corner. He might choose you tonight. Or tomorrow. Or ten years from now. Or even after you die. It’s not that you lack anything; it’s just that I’ve had experiences you have not YET had. I too used to caricature the Christian God. You never would have convinced me that one day I would not. And I’m not saying that one day you will convert. All I’m saying is that unless and until you do, you cannot understand my experience, just as I cannot understand yours. I do not know what life without God is like. I do not even know what it means. You’re different. But we don’t have to be enemies on account of that. ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/148 "2009-08-27T01:57:56Z")
If you’re going to spend THAT much time writing out your argument, why not take the extra two seconds and make a new thread? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/149 "2009-08-27T02:57:36Z")
Sorry about my verbosity. ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/150 "2009-08-27T03:18:45Z")
I really don’t begrudge you your views at all…but this thread is really not the place to debate about atheism, so why not just start a new thread about it? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/151 "2009-08-27T07:07:52Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > What part was a lie? > > I mean, sure it’s kind of dickish to tell kids there’s no santa claus, but it’s not a lie. I was referring to the first two sentences., not the big bolded type. That part he is merely wrong about. ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 8:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/152 "2009-08-27T08:21:31Z")
Santa Claus is homosexual. ---
**Author:** ![APB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e8cbc/32.png) [@APB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/APB)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 10:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/153 "2009-08-27T10:16:28Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Speaking of which, I present [Rudolf II, Holy Roman Emperor.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Archdukerudolf.jpg) (Codpieces were pretty common during that period but I don’t think I’ve ever seen one which curved so far upwards, protruding above the hem of the jerkin.) Wikipedia says: > > “During his periods of self-imposed isolation, he reportedly had affairs with his court chamberlain, Wolfgang von Rumpf, and a series of valets, one of whom, Philip Lang, ruled him for years and was as a result hated by those seeking favor with the emperor.” > > Wolfgang von Rumpf. That’s a wonderfully gay name. Although… > > It seems that later in life he preferred the [“bear”](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/64/Joseph_Heintz_d._%C3%84._002.jpg/469px-Joseph_Heintz_d._%C3%84._002.jpg) look. Naughty, naughty, naughty - you’ve taken that quote from the [Wikipedia article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_II) out of context. As its preceding sentence makes clear, the person who reported this was A. L. Rowse. Which hardly inspires much confidence. Is there any evidence for this outside Rowse’s often fevered imagination? Also, as the article then goes on to point out, there is good evidence for Rudolf’s hetrosexuality. His extensive patronage of Spranger is surely in itself a sufficient indication that, while they may well have kinky, his tastes were firmly hetrosexual. ---
**Author:** ![Shirley\_Ujest](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shirley\_Ujest](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shirley_Ujest)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 10:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/154 "2009-08-27T10:18:52Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Okay, I’m sorry I offended you. It won’t happen again. The joke is stale now anyway; the thread’s turned into a debate about atheism. Fine with me. > > \*\* > THERE IS NO GOD > \*\* As a part time dyslexic, I read this as \*\*There is no Doug. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/155 "2009-08-27T14:18:45Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > I really don’t begrudge you your views at all…but this thread is really not the place to debate about atheism, so why not just start a new thread about it? Well, I’m not really that into it at this time, and besides, you wrote: “…the thread’s turned into a debate about atheism. **Fine with me**.” [Emphasis mine.] It’s like getting an invitation to a dinner, only to show up and be asked, “What the fuck are YOU doing here?”. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/156 "2009-08-27T15:47:05Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > It’s like getting an invitation to a dinner, only to show up and be asked, “What the fuck are YOU doing here?”. Did you bring wine? Because if you did, then I’d really be perturbed. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/157 "2009-08-27T16:46:18Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > No apology necessary. Confusion is not an intention to harm. It is merely a state of mental disarray. 'Kay, no problem. (And I know my mentals is array-dissed and I muchly prett don’t minding.) > [@Liberal](#): > > I can only tell you what I mean by “valid”. Something (like an argument, for example) is valid if its premises lead reasonably to its conclusion. In other words, as long as something follows some set of rules that compel its conclusion, then it is “valid”. And that is the ordinary meaning of validity in the field of logic. > > It is interesting to note that all circular arguments (arguments whose conclusions mirror their premises) are valid. But that doesn’t mean that they’re “sound”. Soundness goes to a higher level than validity. To be sound, an argument must be valid AND its premises must be true. And it is on the premises that we disagree. You surely cannot deny my premises, given my experience, but then neither can I expect you to accept my premises, given YOUR experience. And so, it is like a chess game with the pawns on d4, e4, d5, and e5 — there is great tension, but no cause for disrespect from either of us. I cannot accept your premises either. But that doesn’t mean that I deny your experience. (You have not interacted with God.) Okaaaaay, but I _still_ don’t get how an experience can be invalid. > [@Liberal](#): > > Yes, I get that. And I get that you do not understand the hurt that a person of faith feels when His God is mocked — even though you say it is a different God. Our God is our life. Our spirit. More important than our mother. More important than even our own physical selves. It is personally hurtful to hear or see God mocked, much in the manner that it is hurtful for a child to see or hear his mother mocked. But I don’t expect you to understand that. To you, faith is a choice made like a choice of appetizer in a restaurant. There is a menu of Gods, and one chooses one. But it isn’t like that. He chooses us. And if He has not chosen you, then you have to remember that physical life is temporal. You never know what’s around the corner. He might choose you tonight. Or tomorrow. Or ten years from now. Or even after you die. It’s not that you lack anything; it’s just that I’ve had experiences you have not YET had. I too used to caricature the Christian God. You never would have convinced me that one day I would not. And I’m not saying that one day you will convert. All I’m saying is that unless and until you do, you cannot understand my experience, just as I cannot understand yours. I do not know what life without God is like. I do not even know what it means. You’re different. But we don’t have to be enemies on account of that. I don’t have enemies on this board. (No, really! Opponents, yes, but this is fencing, not war.) My read on the intense insult people feel when their diety is not ‘respected’ is that it is far, far more extreme than any reaction that people have when a relative, friend, or, um, real thing is insulted. However it matches closely to what happens when you attack not a real thing that is external to a person, but their innermost beliefs or ideology. People get pissy when you kick at the pillars that support their entire worldview. And it is _real_ difficult to care about that in the case of religion - from where I stand, it’s embracing error and cuddling it close like a beloved teddy bear. And error bothers me. (Not sure why - proabably a personality defect. It’s not just religious error, either - I’m sniping at errors of all kinds I see on this board. Heck, I’m sometimes a spelling nazi!) And, due to my irritation at error, the idea that one day that mental switch might flip in my brain and make me discard critical thought seems _very_ unlikely, with a probablilty akin to suddently turning into a cat. I literally do not think that my consciousness or identity could survive that fundamental of an alteration and be called the same thing; it would instead be the death of **begbert** and the birth of **fundybegbert** (a guy the current me wouldn’t even _like_). Still, it could happen. Bad things often do. > [@magellan01](#): > > I was referring to the first two sentences., not the big bolded type. That part he is merely wrong about. Okay, then I have no idea what you were talking about. > [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Santa Claus is homosexual. That explains the elves, then! (But not the missus…) ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/158 "2009-08-27T16:52:13Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Oh, and I caricature the Christian God as the guy who flooded the earth, who ordered his people to take land through slaughter of the current residents, who sent his son (himself?) to die, and who felt that that was justified in some way or accomplished something, who lets volcanoes kill people, ect, ect, ect… Nitpick: etc. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/159 "2009-08-27T17:00:27Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Nitpick: etc. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215/160 "2009-08-27T17:25:18Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Santa Claus is homosexual. > [@begbert2](#): > > That explains the elves, then! (But not the missus…) You never heard of Santa’s beard? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-hates-the-fag-king-james-bible/507215.md?page=7)