Apple Rejects Sacrilegious iPhone App

[Sir Hobbes]

False? Not so. There are indeed lots of things Christians do on a regular basis that the bible frowns upon. And there is a lot that the bible states they should do, that they somehow brush off as barbaric in the same breath - while it is often in the same section of their holy book.

Hello, long time lurker here. I made an account awhile back but I haven't ever posted until now.

Mr. Karyuu, I think it would behoove you to cite some examples of this behavior. You are making generalized, sweeping statements that can't be proven one way or the other. Now, that might be your goal and adequate for your person, but for those of us with curious minds it isn't enough. Please post some links or quotes that clarify what you mean.

 

[Baby Tea]

False? Not so. There are indeed lots of things Christians do on a regular basis that the bible frowns upon. And there is a lot that the bible states they should do, that they somehow brush off as barbaric in the same breath - while it is often in the same section of their holy book.

Sounds like you get your theology information from Dawkins or Hitchens. The only thing I will concede that the Bible says Christian should do and that not many do is the lesson seen in the entirety of the book of James. Otherwise it seems like you're talking about the books of the Law, which would only show how little you know of Christian theology.

So until that ceases, I feel quite comfortable not getting along with such kind at all

Yeah, let's choose bigotry. Great idea.

 

[Lord_Panzer]

Why can't we just get along?

I'll make you get along, peace loving hippy.

*shakes fist angerly and decrepitly*

 

[Karyuu]

-Ms- Karyuu, thank you It would be enough to use my nickname alone.

While the second of the Ten Commandments prohibits "graven images," the Catholic Church is one of the best examples of a segment of Christianity that is absolutely crawling with images and carvings of saints, apostles, and Jesus. One.

Leviticus gives some excellent examples of contradictions, most notable the condemning of homosexuality and the eating of certain animals that have never declined in popularity. Two.

The bible is ripe with violence that, were it displayed in secular media (as it often is), Christian parents would frantically hurry to shield their children from seeing. Three.

And so on, and so forth.

As for "choosing" bigotry (what a fascinating case of misinterpretation), I simply "choose" not to go along with all the various bull religion (or its prominent leaders) try to pull, nor the world's attempt to soothe their disgruntled little hearts when someone steps on their toes. They're all big boys and girls, and they can handle someone disagreeing with them without crying to mommy and crying threats of hell.

They can, can't they?

 

[Baby Tea]

*Sigh* And here I was hoping for something new instead of the same-old tired examples that hold no ground under theological scrutiny. Oh well, maybe some day.

While the second of the Ten Commandments prohibits "graven images," the Catholic Church is one of the best examples of a segment of Christianity that is absolutely crawling with images and carvings of saints, apostles, and Jesus. One.

The verse is talking about making a graven image for the purpose of worshiping said image. For instance, if I carves a little cat out of wood and worshiped it as a god. That would be the bad thing. It doesn't say 'don't make pictures of me'. So you've simply misread the verse. That's ok, it happens a lot.

Leviticus gives some excellent examples of contradictions, most notable the condemning of homosexuality and the eating of certain animals that have never declined in popularity. Two.

People can't stay away from the books of the Law, can they? All it does is show how little they know. Christians do not follow the books of the law, because Christians are under grace, not the law (See: Romans 6:14). So that isn't asked of us, so it isn't disobeying. Don't worry, many people make that mistake too.

The bible is ripe with violence that, were it displayed in secular media (as it often is), Christian parents would frantically hurry to shield their children from seeing. Three.

So? What's the point here?

 

[Karyuu]

I apologize for not reading the first point correctly, that really is my mistake. Major woops.

As for the second, it is still a point of -contradictory- Christian behavior when I see protests against homosexuality and not protests against the other abominations mentioned in Leviticus. It does not matter whether the law is for Christians or nonbelievers. The point is that they protest one thing, and one thing only while many are mentioned in the same vein. I'm eager to understand how this translates.

Third, the point is yet again contradictions. Violence in the bible is acceptable, violence in secular media must be avoided to not disturb a child's mind.

 

[Baby Tea]

As for the second, it is still a point of -contradictory- Christian behavior when I see protests against homosexuality and not protests against the other abominations mentioned in Leviticus. It does not matter whether the law is for Christians or nonbelievers. The point is that they protest one thing, and one thing only while many are mentioned in the same vein. I'm eager to understand how this translates.

Ahh, see now we're seeing the blanket statements. Christ said the most important commandment was to "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind", and the second most important commandment was to "Love your neighbor as yourself". Now, when people are talking about how 'God hates fags' and so forth, they aren't being very 'loving', are they?

So is Christianity to blame for their completely missing the point? I would say: no. Christ made it clear to not be a hateful person, and in fact the book of James in it's entirety is talking about how Christians should be not just 'passive' loving, but actively loving by helping the sick and poor and hungry wherever we are. Not to use that to coax them into following Jesus, but loving and helping them for the sake of love and kindness.

So the hateful fundamentalists and the ignorant get on my nerves too! Sure do! But they are not the proper representation of what Christianity is. They are actually a more proper representation of the Pharisees that Christ himself said had no grasp of what was right.

Third, the point is yet again contradictions. Violence in the bible is acceptable, violence in secular media must be avoided to not disturb a child's mind.

If you think I'm going to be reading my 7 year child about David cutting of Goliath's head and placing it on display in the temple, or Jezebel being pushed from a window to die on the street and get eating by dogs so that nothing was left but her hands and feet...you've got another thing coming. And you're also bringing to light the fundamentalists again. I play violent games, but I'm not going to let that same 7 year old play them. Once they are older, and have matured, then they can make their own choices. But playing violent games or watching violent movies has nothing to do with Christianity.

 

[timmytom1]

Religion deserves no more respect, for being religion, than any other part of human culture. We put it on a pedestal and bend over backwards to please the "faithful," even when they try to govern all our lives by rules only they follow.

This might offend some people? And I might be offended by an app that pokes fun at the Flying Spaghetti Monster - my poor sensibilities will be disturbed and my world will be in shambles. Is my faith of no more importance? What of a practitioner of Pagan faiths, that becomes irritated at a game that puts Thor in a pansy light. Will Apple reject it too, on the basis that Pagans across the world might be upset?

Get outta here.

They wouldn`t dare make fun of FSS.....Would they? *thinks for a second* i think we should burn down apple HQ anyway , mainly because nearly all of their products are shit and itunes has no Aerosmith or AC/DC

 

[megapenguinx]

Seems like harmless fun to me. I hate it when people are overly sensitive about this sort of thing...not like they HAVE to download it

 

[Nuke_em_05]

Leviticus gives some excellent examples of contradictions, most notable the condemning of homosexuality and the eating of certain animals that have never declined in popularity. Two.

People can't stay away from the books of the Law, can they? All it does is show how little they know. Christians do not follow the books of the law, because Christians are under grace, not the law (See: Romans 6:14). So that isn't asked of us, so it isn't disobeying. Don't worry, many people make that mistake too.

Just a pet peeve of mine, one verse, out of context.

Romans Chapter 6 is in regard to the idea that people would keep sinning because one sin would condemn you. It is a kind of counter to the slippery slope or "anything worth doing" idea. Because you are under grace doesn't mean you can do what you want.

Matthew 5:17-20: 17 "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 "Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 "For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven."

Just so you know, that's Jesus talking. The law still applies, but grace covers us. That doesn't mean we keep sinning because we have grace.

As to the original post: I find a lot of iPhone applications offensive, but they are allowed, why not another? If you don't like it, don't get it.

 

[Kiutu]

If you dont want to risk sinning cause your god has to be Mr Important then dont. I dont see why we should care about offending christianity. They certainly dont care about offending everyone else.

 

[scotth266]

As a Catholic, I find nothing offensive with this. Of course, I don't see it as being funny either, but it's all personal taste I suppose.

Let the man make his silly apps without fear of persecution, I say.

 

[scotth266]

Snip.

*Bows down* You sir, have phrased it the best that anybody could. Bravo.

I cannot count the number of times I have said: Hate the extremists, and not just the Christians in general. It's sort of amusing to see people accuse all Catholics of being hateful bigots when their posts are filled with dripping bile themselves.

 

[Baby Tea]

Romans Chapter 6 is in regard to the idea that people would keep sinning because one sin would condemn you. It is a kind-of a counter to the slippery slope or "anything worth doing" idea. Because you are under grace doesn't mean you can do what you want.

Matthew 5:17-20: 17 "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 "Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 "For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven."

Just so you know, that's Jesus talking. The law still applies, but grace covers us. That doesn't mean we keep sinning because we have grace.

First, I never said you can do what you want.
Second, you should have kept reading Romans 6:

What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey?whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness

Being under grace isn't a freedom to do what you want, it's a freedom the the law (Which is impossible to fulfill), and it's a freedom from sin (Which the author of Romans points out leads to death). The impossibility of the law is shown by the last verse you provided: "For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven." The Pharisees were the epitome of the law. Everything literally acted out according to the law. Christ is saying we have to be better then them if we are following the law, but we aren't. We are under grace. You're right in that Christ fulfilled it, thus we are under that grace, not the law.

 

[WingedFortress]

Nice ten commandments burn. I was on his side until I read it.

 

[Nuke_em_05]

Romans Chapter 6 is in regard to the idea that people would keep sinning because one sin would condemn you. It is a kind-of a counter to the slippery slope or "anything worth doing" idea. Because you are under grace doesn't mean you can do what you want.

Matthew 5:17-20: 17 "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 "Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 "For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven."

Just so you know, that's Jesus talking. The law still applies, but grace covers us. That doesn't mean we keep sinning because we have grace.

First, I never said you can do what you want.
Second, you should have kept reading Romans 6:

What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey?whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness

Being under grace isn't a freedom to do what you want, it's a freedom the the law (Which is impossible to fulfill), and it's a freedom from sin (Which the author of Romans points out leads to death). The impossibility of the law is shown by the last verse you provided: "For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven." The Pharisees were the epitome of the law. Everything literally acted out according to the law. Christ is saying we have to be better then them if we are following the law, but we aren't. We are under grace. You're right in that Christ fulfilled it, thus we are under that grace, not the law.

I have read Romans 6. Did you read what I said? You seem to be repeating me. The point is this, the law remains. The law defines specific sins. We are not to sin. Therefore we are not break the law. Yes, we have grace, grace means our sins our forgiven, but we do not have license to sin/break the law.

Perhaps the question I wish to ask is why do you refute the citing of the law? What defines sin?

Waxing semi-philosophical here, but "Grace" and "Law" are two ways of looking at the same desired behavior. True grace is forgiveness of sin and never returning to it. If you have grace, you do not sin because it is no longer your nature. If you do not have grace, the law defines what you cannot do if you wish to avoid sin. The law applies to both those with and without grace, simply those with grace do not need to mind the law as they wouldn't brake it. You are creating a double-standard.

 

[thiosk]

I filed this in the lolwut section of my brain.

 

[Glerken]

Seems a little ridiculous to reject that app.
I really don't see anything wrong with it...

 

[MortisLegio]

it sounds like a really dumb app when politicians are easier and alot more fun to make fun of