Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 The good Jesus loving folk who have had it with abortion are willing to take God's mission into their own hands. For them, I provide this link to Christian News, a site lovingly provided by those lovely souls at ArmyofGod.com. Today's helpful headlines inform us of a firebombing of a Shreveport clinic and cheerfully provide tips and links for the most effective use of molotov cocktails. As a good christian you might want to check out their link to "homo news" which provides links to interesting stories about that "filthy sodomite" Elton John or about the long kept secret that all the Nazi's were gay and their persecution of homosexuals an elaborate cover up. Hate the sin, firebomb the sinner, Amen. I have to believe that if Jesus were here today he would be much more concerned with these "christians" than with Elton John, filthy sodomite though he may be. Not that anyone around here ever sounds even faintly like these false christians. I rather think though that if there was a website where gays were advocating the firebombing of christian churches, it would be big news. I certainly do not mean that all christians are like these, just that they exist, make plenty of noise and are more than occasionally dangerous. I wonder if these hate groups advocating firebombing are coming under much scrutiny intellegence wise. The danger they pose may be limited in comparison to foreign terrorists but still, it isn't as if they have sleeper cells or are impossible to find. I think they have firebombed three clinics so far this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Didn't Jesus attack the merchants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Didn't Jesus attack the merchants? 543207[/snapback] So firebomb a !@#$ing Macy's instead. What does that have to do with anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 So firebomb a !@#$ing Macy's instead. What does that have to do with anything? 543248[/snapback] The fact that Jesus would in fact "not look the other way". But in fact confront the sinners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 The fact that Jesus would in fact "not look the other way". But in fact confront the sinners. 543257[/snapback] I'm no Bible scholar but I don't think he "attacked" them in the firebomb sense of an attack. He tipped over a few tables and scale of the money lenders and tossed them out of the Temple. If you think what these people are doing, firebombing clinics and such, is okay, don't be coy about it, come out and say so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I'm no Bible scholar 543310[/snapback] right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 right 543312[/snapback] Seems like I was not too far off: "Jesus entered into the temple of God, and drove out all of those who sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the money changers' tables and the seats of those who sold the doves." Matthew 21:12 Does that seem like the equivalent to you of firebombing a clinic? Does it seem to you to be a relevant issue to bring up during a discussion of what Jesus might think of Elton John and people firebombing clinics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I'm no Bible scholar but I don't think he "attacked" them in the firebomb sense of an attack. He tipped over a few tables and scale of the money lenders and tossed them out of the Temple. If you think what these people are doing, firebombing clinics and such, is okay, don't be coy about it, come out and say so. 543310[/snapback] What difference does it make. He was in effect making it non-useful. Again, I believe Jesus would have no issue with firebombing the clinics so long as noone is killed doing so. Do I support them, no. Do I think it's okay that it is happening, yes, so long as noone is killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Seems like I was not too far off: "Jesus entered into the temple of God, and drove out all of those who sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the money changers' tables and the seats of those who sold the doves." Matthew 21:12 Does that seem like the equivalent to you of firebombing a clinic? Does it seem to you to be a relevant issue to bring up during a discussion of what Jesus might think of Elton John and people firebombing clinics? 543325[/snapback] don't go pulling scripture out of the Bible when it fits your argument....but reject the rest of it when it doesn't fit your position. for the record...i do not in any way support firebombings of any organization...and that includes baby killing clinics, and sodomite bathhouses, or whatever. i don't give those so called "christian" organizations any more license to do what they are doing than the abortion clinics. I think they should be sought after and prosecuted at the fullest extent. If a bombing takes place and a death occurs during the carrying out of that bombing, I think the bomber should be eligible for the death penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 What difference does it make. He was in effect making it non-useful. Again, I believe Jesus would have no issue with firebombing the clinics so long as noone is killed doing so. Do I support them, no. Do I think it's okay that it is happening, yes, so long as noone is killed. 543329[/snapback] That is the thing about firebombing, it tends to kill people. No difference then, is that it? Tell you what, let me firebomb your house and you can tip over a table at my local church and then we will compare notes to see if there is a difference. Really, that is your version of Christ? A firebombing Jesus? Wow. Can we pin this post so that I won't be accused of having made that up? Would it be okay for anti-war protesters to firebomb a recruiting station "so long as noone [sic] is killed..."??? Can I firebomb the Dolphins' training camp "so long as noone [sic] is killed..."? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 That is the thing about firebombing, it tends to kill people. No difference then, is that it? Tell you what, let me firebomb your house and you can tip over a table at my local church and then we will compare notes to see if there is a difference. Really, that is your version of Christ? A firebombing Jesus? Wow. Can we pin this post so that I won't be accused of having made that up? Would it be okay for anti-war protesters to firebomb a recruiting station "so long as noone [sic] is killed..."??? Can I firebomb the Dolphins' training camp "so long as noone [sic] is killed..."? 543346[/snapback] Nowhere did I say you wouldn't go to jail. In addition, I shoot at people that try to firebomb my house. But I have no problem with what they are doing. But I guess you don't understand when I say I have no problem with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 The fact that Jesus would in fact "not look the other way". But in fact confront the sinners. 543257[/snapback] Actually, that was entierly not the point of the story of the money changers in the temple. The point was that one should not profit of worshipping the Lord, as they were doing. So you'd have a point...if abortions were performed in churches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 don't go pulling scripture out of the Bible when it fits your argument....but reject the rest of it when it doesn't fit your position. 543336[/snapback] Look to thine own house. Seems like "christians" do a lot of that now-a-days. ....Oh, and for the record, the next time someone misquotes scripture as was done here by characterizing what Jesus did as an "attack" similar to firebombing a clinic, I will dig up the scripture to see if the quote was wrong or not whether that bothers you or not. Are only your type of Christians allowed to quote scripture? Interesting how my use of scripture, word for word accurate in this case, troubles you more than VA's inaccurate use of it to justify, of all things, firebombing clinics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 So which one is right? "Blessed are those who prefer others before themselves." -- Baha'i Faith "Hurt not others in ways that you would you yourself would find hurtful." -- Buddhism "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." --Christianity "This is the sum of all duty: treat others as you yourself would be treated." -- Hinduism "No one of you is a believer until you desire for another that which you desire for yourself." -- Islam "In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, regard all creatures as you would regard your own self." -- Jainism "What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor." -- Judaism "Be not estranged from another for God dwells in every heart." -- Sikhism "Human nature is good only when it does not do unto another whatever is not good for its own self." -- Zoroastrianism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 So which one is right? "Blessed are those who prefer others before themselves." -- Baha'i Faith "Hurt not others in ways that you would you yourself would find hurtful." -- Buddhism "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." --Christianity "This is the sum of all duty: treat others as you yourself would be treated." -- Hinduism "No one of you is a believer until you desire for another that which you desire for yourself." -- Islam "In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, regard all creatures as you would regard your own self." -- Jainism "What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor." -- Judaism "Be not estranged from another for God dwells in every heart." -- Sikhism "Human nature is good only when it does not do unto another whatever is not good for its own self." -- Zoroastrianism 543364[/snapback] You forgot: "Hate the sin and firebomb the sinner". --VABills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Look to thine own house. Seems like "christians" do a lot of that now-a-days. ....Oh, and for the record, the next time someone misquotes scripture as was done here by characterizing what Jesus did as an "attack" similar to firebombing a clinic, I will dig up the scripture to see if the quote was wrong or not whether that bothers you or not. Are only your type of Christians allowed to quote scripture? Interesting how my use of scripture, word for word accurate in this case, troubles you more than VA's inaccurate use of it to justify, of all things, firebombing clinics. 543358[/snapback] i have no problem with someone misquoting scripture. what i have a problem with .... as i stated....is using it when it fits your arguement but rejecting it when it doesn't fit your arguement. VA didn't use quotations and i already stated that i disagreed with his position when he compared the two as being ok. whats the matter? you didn't get what you wanted for Christmas....errr.....X-Mas this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 Nowhere did I say you wouldn't go to jail. In addition, I shoot at people that try to firebomb my house. But I have no problem with what they are doing. But I guess you don't understand when I say I have no problem with it. 543350[/snapback] Oh, so you would actually jail firebombers, how comforting. You don't like abortion so its okay to firebomb clinics, I get it. I also have some principled objections to things other people do but I guess I'm just a different kind of Christian as I would have a serious problem with firebombing those people. I think I understand all too well what you are saying here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 i have no problem with someone misquoting scripture. what i have a problem with .... as i stated....is using it when it fits your arguement but rejecting it when it doesn't fit your arguement. VA didn't use quotations and i already stated that i disagreed with his position when he compared the two as being ok. whats the matter? you didn't get what you wanted for Christmas....errr.....X-Mas this year? 543369[/snapback] Actually, he didn't use it to support his position. He used it to disprove VABills...which was entirely appropriate, since VA was using it himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Hamilton Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 don't go pulling scripture out of the Bible when it fits your argument....but reject the rest of it when it doesn't fit your position. 543336[/snapback] What Mickey did is actually fundamental logic. He was using those wacko's own literature (the Bible) to point out an inherent contradiction in their thinking. Mickey doesn't have to buy their logic to do that; he's just noting the inconsistency in their own thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 i have no problem with someone misquoting scripture. what i have a problem with .... as i stated....is using it when it fits your arguement but rejecting it when it doesn't fit your arguement. VA didn't use quotations and i already stated that i disagreed with his position when he compared the two as being ok. whats the matter? you didn't get what you wanted for Christmas....errr.....X-Mas this year? 543369[/snapback] Please show where it is that I have ever rejected Matthew 21:12 in the past and now embrace its teachings? Better yet, you apparently have reached a conclusion as to the merits of my faith including its sincerity. Totally inappropriate I think for this board but if that is the can of worms you want to open up, fine, show me what scriptures I have supposedly rejected that was the basis for your position. Isn't there something in the commandments about bearing false witness? Oh, wait, I'm not allowed to quote scripture according to you, the self appointed judge of such things. Don't you get it? I am not professing the principles inherent in the quote (see CTM's explanation), I presented it simply to show he was twisting the proverb by using the word "attack" so that it meant something it didn't. Was there a better way to show that he was wrong besides presenting the quote from the bible? Am I not allowed to do that unless I am christian enough for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts