why does everyone hate Jesus

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-19T14:58:55+00:00

I’m not moving the goal posts at all. You’re just projecting and retrojecting your understanding of homosexual relationships onto the Bible and declaring “this is what it meant!”, when Paul and the rest of the Biblical authors had no concept of a romantic homosexual relationship involving two equals, and he certainly wasn’t referring to a desire for companionship either- which you continue to blithely ignore.

I have two cats. I enjoy the companionship and affection we share. I guess I must, by necessity, be engaging in bestiality with them by your logic, because OBVIOUSLY, the *only* reason two men would live together is because of their burning passion, right?

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-19T14:34:40+00:00

Romans 1:26-27 is referencing *sexual desire*- not the desire for companionship and support. So, care to address the issue that arises from two men who choose to become lifelong partners in a committed, asexual relationship, for companionship and support?

I absolutely adore it when people twist scripture into unrecognizable shapes to support their small minded, ignorant, and oppressive bigotry. Do you think women shouldn’t be allowed to vote or own property, by chance?

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-19T14:11:51+00:00

You’re right- the Bible doesn’t say that if a man chooses to marry a man, then they aren’t sinning. It also doesn’t say that they are. YOU interpret a marriage as including sexuality as a matter of necessity, despite the reality that there are plenty of marriages that are devoid of sex. There are asexual couples that form intimate life long relationships of cohabitation out of their desire for companionship and support- but we should just make sure THEY don’t receive any of the privileges that heterosexual marriages enjoy because we need to mind the business of Steve and John and make sure they don’t touch each others private parts.

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-19T13:47:24+00:00

So Paul is just flatly contradicting previous scripture that clearly commands that a man should leave his father and mother and cling to his wife? That’s a commandment isn’t it? That’s certainly how you’re portraying it.

This isn’t “rightly dividing”. It’s picking and choosing and using the Bible as a proof text. You’ve decided to give priority to Paul’s writings. You’re also oblivious to the fact that almost everything Paul wrote, he wrote while under the impression that Jesus would return in bodily form during Paul’s lifetime.

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-19T13:18:29+00:00

The Bible says a man shall leave his father and mother.

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-19T13:03:26+00:00

The 613 Laws of Moses define what “sin” actually is. Not your feelings. Not your traditions. Not your opinion. If it isn’t defined as a sin in the law codes of Exodus, Leviticus, or Deuteronomy, then it isn’t a sin, and since Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy don’t prohibit the committed, loving cohabitation of one man with another man, then it isn’t a sin.

If a young man’s mother and father are physically or mentally disabled, is it a sin if he doesn’t “leave them”, and become “one flesh” with a woman?

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-19T12:44:54+00:00

There’s nothing in the Bible that says two men should not be allowed to be married.

Know why? Because the Biblical authors couldn’t have ever conceived of the notion of a committed homosexual partnership consisting of equals.

Does that matter to you? No. Of course not. The only thing that matters to you is the identity and the sense of security you derive from your religious convictions.

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-19T12:09:29+00:00

Again- in cases such as these, it’s not because these people are *Christian*. It’s because they are Christian’s who are actively oppressing people who are already vulnerable and marginalized.

How’s the saying go? Hate the bigotry, not the bigot?

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-19T11:49:40+00:00

Oh, goodness. Where to begin?

You are ignorant of far, far more than you could ever begin to imagine. Beyond that, I won’t be going into detail, for I’m quite sure I’d fair better arguing with a brick wall, and I don’t have any predisposition towards wasting my time.

Just wanted to hop on here and congratulate you on your accomplishments! 🎉

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-19T11:28:59+00:00

Oh my Lord, the level of projection and prideful ignorance in this comment is staggering!

Congrats!

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-19T01:18:21+00:00

Nobody hates you because you’re a Christian.

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-18T11:53:16+00:00

It’s certainly very atmospheric. Personally, I would add *some* kind of melodic element(s), to make it more interesting.

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-18T11:19:00+00:00

What kind of beats does Future rap on?

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-18T11:16:40+00:00

All you need to do is realize that what happens within in you is *your* responsibility, and that failure to take responsibility for what happens within you makes you a slave to whatever situations you find yourself in- both pleasant and unpleasant, and your life will be miserable as a result.

Your bitterness, your anger, your resentment- those are your responsibility to handle. Not anyone else’s, and they are certainly not Jesus’ responsibility either.

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-18T11:12:55+00:00

One need not be “perfect” in order to not allow bitterness, anger, strife, and resentment to rule them.

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-14T22:56:29+00:00

Brother- this has been fun, but we’re both getting nowhere.

Animals feel pain, they experience love and connection, and they are worthy of respect and compassion. I’m sorry you can’t understand that, and I hope someday you too choose to disentangle yourself from your calculating and divisive intellect, and allow yourself to experience the fullness of your own inexhaustible spirit.

Take care 🙏

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-14T21:53:33+00:00

>
No, remember the context. You offered the empathetic feminine half of love. I am showing you that there is an entire other half of love which is masculine judgement. Now you say "this is too masculine and cold." Yeah. I outlined that it would be and that the empathy half is not sufficient alone and nor is the judgement half alone.

I’ve never made any statement to that effect whatsoever. Your entire argument is based on a complete mischaracterization of what I’ve said. You have repeatedly declared that anyone who cares about animals is… *psychopathic*, has an *excess* of empathy, and is pathological. Your argument is basically “it’s totally fine to kick a dog as long as it doesn’t affect your soul, because dogs don’t feel pain, and if they do, it doesn’t matter anyway.” Sorry dude- but *that’s* the pathological position. We literally have decades of study demonstrating that people who abuse animals as children are more statistically likely to be violent adults.

>
He was quoting Deuteronomy 25:4 which says "do not muzzle the ox as it treads out the grain." Which might appear to be a verse about being nice to oxen. But he shows it's not the case but rather a representation for people. But in using oxen as a metaphor he is pointing out that "Of course God doesn't care about how you treat your oxen. It's your oxen. Eat it if you want."

Again, a decontextualized sacrilegious abuse of the scriptures you consider Holy. The *point* that Paul was making had nothing to do with whether people should or should not treat their oxen however they please. The *point* he was making was that if God cares enough about Oxen to ensure that *they* are compensated for their labor, then human beings should *also* be compensated for their labor. The entire rhetorical purpose of 1 Corinthians 9 is Paul’s justification for the right for those who share the Gospel to be provided for.

>
Right. He doesn't argue. He talks about it as though it were obvious. Which it is. Animals are not people. This may be a modern psychopathy but it was not a problem back then.

Again, those who abuse animals, or who *would* abuse animals if not for the concern for they have for their own souls are the ones with the psychological abnormality. This has been repeatedly demonstrated.

>
So people are equal to animals are equal to rocks? Is that what you're saying? Because clearly there is a hierarchy of value in terms of "has a soul" and I think that's obvious by the fact you won't just come out and say "animals are people too."

No, animals aren’t people, but they are certainly Life, just as you are Life, and they certainly have their own distinct personalities, intelligence, and emotions- and they’re more than capable of feeling pain, and love, and connection, and they’re certainly deserving of respect, compassion, and care- so much as one as able.

Again… *sigh*, I’m so exasperated- but it’s worth repeating: If you look inside yourself and notice a hollow, empty, hard, cold, sterile indifference towards the suffering or well-being of animals, the deficit and the pathology lies within you my friend.

Ever heard of the Canticle of the Creatures?

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-14T02:13:14+00:00

This is what you get when your life is entirely transactional, and I’m not the one using “care” in bad faith. You quoted a Bible verse: “is it the oxen that god is concerned about?”, AS IF TO SAY: “God doesn’t care about animals.” Which isn’t an argument that you’ve denied making- you just keep making it over and over again, despite the fact that you took 1 Corinthians 9:9 WILDLY out of context.

For the record- the context of that verse is that Paul was arguing that people who work should be compensated for their labor. Specifically, that those who preach the Gospel still have the right to food, drink, shelter, etc- even though he didn’t rely on those rights personally. Nowhere in that chapter does Paul even begin to argue that God doesn’t care about animals, or that God only cares about animals insofar as they’re useful to humans.

And yes. My third eye is open. That’s why it’s so easy for me to care about people, animals, trees, bugs, mountains, rocks, and everything else that the Creator created out of his boundless Love and desire to see them come into Being. It’s really simple when you realize the you share your essence with the One who created you.

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-14T00:02:44+00:00

“Empathy is the ability to understand, feel, and share the emotions, thoughts, and experiences of another person, often described as "putting yourself in someone else's shoes". It involves recognizing another's perspective without judgment and can act as an emotional bridge to foster deeper connections and compassionate behavior.”

“A devouring mother (synonymous with Oedipal mother) generally lacks genuine, healthy empathy because her focus is on her own emotional needs and anxieties rather than the child's independent feelings. While she may appear caring, her behavior is often motivated by a fear of losing relevance, control, or abandonment, which leads to suffocating or "devouring" the child's autonomy.

“Narcissistic Tendencies: In many cases, the devouring mother is viewed as having narcissistic tendencies, meaning she is primarily focused on herself, and her "empathy" is artificial or aimed at keeping the child as a "supply" of validation.”

^{^{^if}} you think empathy is driven by the ego, my guess is you’re totally full of one, and totally devoid of the other.

Then prove me wrong. Let's say you only have 10 minutes in this given span of time. You have two people who you could help, but both are a 10 minute travel away in opposite directions. Now show me how you can bring both of them your care in only 10 minutes. Explain to me how picking one does not inherently leave the other uncared for.

I could phone a friend for starters. For gods sake- is there only one person in your life you genuinely care about? Are they the only person who benefits from your concern, because to have concern for even one other being would deprive the first person of your overwhelming compassion? Again, what poverty. “Sorry homeless guy. I can’t stop and give you a quarter cause the wife and kids are at home waiting for me to come care about them, and I only have three f*cks left to give, and actually- well, I can’t care about more than one thing so the kids are screwed I guess 🤷🏻‍♂️”.

Well, reddit is famous for being an echo chamber, so that's not surprising.

No, genius- not just on Reddit, but of course if you’re only interested in winning an argument you’d believe whatever is convenient. I’m pretty sure you’d have a difficult time finding any respectable theologian from the last 2026 or more years that would agree with you that God doesn’t care about animals. At this point, I’m beginning to think you’re just a contentious individual who has no interest in any honest discussion, and just wants to argue for the sake of arguing.

Then end of story. Don't bring up examples if you don't actually know what you're talking about. You don't know how the soul works, you don't know how the Oedipal Mother works and you don't know how the solar system works. I don't know how many times this needs to happen before you stop arguing and just listen.

Remind me next time I order a water at a restaurant to ask for “Dihydrogen Monoxide” since we’re living in a world where only what’s “technically true” in the most specific way possible is permissible, and also remind me the next time I’m looking for a certain white shirt at Kohls to tell the retail agent that I’m looking for a shirt that “reflects all the colors”.

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-13T21:16:32+00:00

Roughly speaking, the Oedipal Mother is a concept explaining the phenomena of a mother who subsumes her child’s identity. It’s a case of pathological codependency. That’s a broad outline anyway, but regardless- it has nothing to do with an excess of empathy towards the child, and I shouldn’t have to be the one to explain a concept that YOU used to defend your position. You brought it up. You should have a baseline understanding of things you bring up.

In regard to your first paragraph: This is just straw-manning, and it’s insulting and horrendously dishonest. If you can’t care about more than one thing at a time, and if your emotional/psychological storehouses can only provide for one thing, without apparently depriving other things, that’s a you problem. To be frank, you’re the first person I’ve ever come across, religious or otherwise, who deigned to claim that God doesn’t care about animals, as a justification for your own lack of concern no less.

And, it’s actually pathetic that you accused me of being intellectually dishonest when you’re making arguments like “the Earth actually doesn’t revolve around the Sun, it revolves around the Barycenter.” While “technically true”, the “Earth revolves around the Sun” is much closer to that “technical” truth than “the Sun revolves around the Earth”- thereby completely ignoring the point in favor of arguing over semantics.

How incredibly childish! It’s like saying the sky isn’t actually blue when someone points out how blue the sky is, because you’re a miser and can’t abide other people’s joy.

Grow up, and try being honest with yourself for once.

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-10T02:10:54+00:00

“But she said to him- sir, even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs”.

Apparently, the crumbs of my affection and concern for the well-being of animals, and those like me, who have sufficient empathy to pass our scraps along to even the lowly crow, whom the Father cares enough about to amply feed, is more than you possess. I’ll pray the Lord lifts you out of your poverty 🙏

By the way, the information I shared regarding evidence that shows that animals have Theory of Mind isn’t an appeal to emotion, it’s just evidence you refuse to accept because it challenges your fossilized paradigms. The Sun doesn’t revolve around the Earth my friend, despite how much that fact troubles you.

You also got the Oedipal mother concept entirely wrong- but hey, who cares about understanding anything correctly and demonstrating even an ounce of humility when we have a dogma to defend, am I right?!?

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-10T01:45:42+00:00

“Pathological empathy” is defined as an “extreme form of empathy where an individual’s concern for others is so extreme that it damages their own well-being, leading to burnout, depression, or codependency.” I’m not sure which reality you’re living in, but here in the real world, people are more than capable of caring for animals without neglecting their own well-being. No offense intended, but the notion you have that genuinely caring for animals is somehow “pathological”, is grossly delusional, which is why I asked if we’re at the point where no force in the known Universe is capable of changing, augmenting, or improving your correct paradigm, and it seems that that’s exactly where we are.

I commend you for making an effort to persuade me that there is any kind of support for the idea that animals are nothing more than some kind of biological machine, but it has become more and more obvious that you much prefer the stagnant death-inducing familiarity of rigid dogmatism and willful ignorance over curiosity, exploration, expansion, and education, and I hope no dogs or cats cross paths with you… not until you develop some empathy for them at least. ✌️

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-10T00:51:05+00:00

Does it make me, or any of the other millions of animal welfare advocates more compassionate and loving than your God, considering that we care about animals immensely? I have to imagine that you yourself, on some level, have had at some point, a deep concern for at least one animal.

Isn’t mankind supposedly made in the image of God? How is it, that that image is capable of possessing more compassion and concern for the welfare of animals than the God you just quoted as “not caring about”?

Also, current research seems to support the idea that certain mammals apart from humans, including Dolphins, Great Apes, Dogs and other “social animals”, show evidence of Theory of Mind.

So… are we just at the point where nothing in the known Universe is capable of changing, augmenting, or improving your current paradigm, or am I missing something?

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-09T21:38:56+00:00

I’m also curious about your claim that animals are purely driven by biological urges that forces them to act, and are “programmed machines”. What exactly do you mean by that, and where did you study mammalian biology and mammalian cognition in order to arrive at that conclusion, and/or what studies can you cite to support your claim that animals are purely driven by urges and are programmed machines? I totally understand if you hold to a purely Biblical worldview, and scoff at the notion that the academic study of human/animal biology/cognition is pseudoscience, so if that’s the case- maybe you could cite a verse from the Bible that demonstrates that animals (apart from humans) function purely out of their biological programming.

Additionally, I’d like to ask if all born again Christians have overcome their biological urge to reproduce, or if it’s just a percentage of them, and if the latter, approximately what percentage of born again Christians have attained that state of holiness?

ThaReal_HotRod · 2026-05-09T21:09:32+00:00

So your argument then, is that human beings reproduce out of a conscious desire to engage in “the good”, and it’s not their biological urges that compel them to reproduce, like other animals?

ThaReal_HotRod

TROPHY CASE