this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2025
637 points (97.5% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

34650 readers
2755 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wabasso@lemmy.ca 33 points 3 days ago (4 children)
[–] db2@lemmy.world 83 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm going to stick my neck out and say it was something stupid and ignorant.

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 72 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Careful, kirk warned us about sticking our necks out

[–] db2@lemmy.world 59 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] don@lemmy.ca 51 points 3 days ago

Poured his heart out, he did.

Well, someone did.

[–] Habahnow@sh.itjust.works 26 points 3 days ago (9 children)

watched the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZPWbpOnZ-8

Kirk actually has a good point in that those lines are from the old testament, which Christians believe doesn't apply, and only believe in the new testament. Assuming Kirk is right that it isn't in the new testament ( the Cambridge speaker doesn't contest it either, for whatever that is worth). From the the student then pivots to talking about a new testament description along the lines of: Man shall not sleep with man, which he says can be interpreted differently than man and man and could be man and prostitute. Kirk contends that the traditions and interpretations were created during the time that the writings were created, and so there is no loss of translation then, and those understandings have been passed down until down consistently. I will say, i've summised this, but it is a lot more of a meandering argument afterwards that is not very interesting to watch.

I feel like the cambridge student shouldn't have even brought up the lines in videos above because it doesn't completely apply to Kirk's religious beliefs. The student studied the bible decently enough to make his point, but it seemed he needed additional context of Kirk's beliefs to make a strong point against Kirk.

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 34 points 3 days ago

those understandings have been passed down until down consistently.

[x] Doubt

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

he actually didn’t dodge anything, nor did he make a good point.

he stated that morals and right and wrong are immutable/unchanging.

so Charlie is now trapped to make a choice,

A. he’s wrong and morality is dependent on the situation, and so his whole platform regarding how he treats minorities has no justification.

B. he’s wrong and his god purposely demanded atrocities, and was wrong in the past, and is fallible, in which case his whole platform can’t be considered moral based on the teachings of his god.

so his answer is he still didn’t like it, which is him admitting defeat but refusing to decide in which way he believes his god is wrong

[–] Naich@lemmings.world 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If they don't believe in the old testament, why do they want the 10 commandments put up in schools?

[–] Habahnow@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

yeah idk who "they" are specifically (i know in some state/city, they want the 10 commandments in schools), but I doubt they are a religious group that believes in all of the old testament, which means you make a very good point.

[–] xxd@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's not really a good point, it's just classic cherrypicking. Jesus himself said in Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." so clearly the old testament law should still apply. Christians are just faced with the reality that they could not live their life in accordance with old testament law in todays age, and have therefore chosen to ignore laws from the old testament.

[–] MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

Im not a Bible scholar. I have always taken the distinction between abolish and fulfill here to be, I'm not here to say the old law was wrong and so let's get rid of it, I'm here to say we have completed the period of time for which the old law was right, and we have a new way going forward for this new time.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

Charlie dodged the point. If morals are objective and unchanging, then it must be the case that either:

  • all of the laws listed in the OT are at least morally permissible then and now

Or

  • God commanded immoral things
[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Sacred tradition? Was Kirk Catholic? And if not why not? Just a grab bag of pick and choose your tradition? Both Protestants and Catholics say that will send you straight to hell. Might as well call yourself a gnostic if you're going that route (though many of them didn't have sex hangups).

[–] lovely_reader@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

There are no mainstream Christian denominations that don't believe that the Old Testament is the word of their God, so I'm not sure how the student could have prepared for that particular nonsense juke

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Most Christians believe they live under the New Covenant and not Old Testament law.

You are right that it is widely accepted as the word of God though.

But it was totally fair for god to do that in the past because morals and ethics... have changed... whoops.

[–] krunklom@lemmy.zip 11 points 3 days ago

So.

Here's an idea.

A cynical take on Christian nationalism pushing for ONLY the things in the bible that are utterly absurd and contrary to modern society.

Like, making an actual push for ONLY the shit that no one would could possibly take seriously.

I'm no bible scholar but I'm sure there's a bunch of stuff in the New Testament that we could cherry pick as well.

[–] muzzle@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No one should debate these trolls, they should be answered with stony silence. It works wonders with my 5 years old.

[–] Habahnow@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

I feel in this case, it just "proves them right" . Your 5 year old won't begin to use silence as a sign that they're right and spread videos of that debate to thousands of people.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago

Fucking hate shit like this.

BURN!

Well, uh, could I see the reply.

NO!

[–] ozoned@piefed.social 7 points 3 days ago

I too would like to see the rebuttal.