Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 Start a thread with Jesus, abortion, firebombing, and homosexuality in the first paragraph and wait for ferment... 543435[/snapback] Really, what could go wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 Where did I say I was "more" Christian then anyone, little man? I said I don't see how anyone who condones the murder of children can call themselves Christian. But alas, the wolf called himself a sheep. Yet you condemn the firebombers asking how they can be so holy as to do that while condemning abortion. Hypocrisy is thy name. 543445[/snapback] You questioned how a christian could beleive as I. I won't even get into how you convert my opposition to firebombing clinics to one where I condone the murder of children. Given your ability to leap synaptic canyons in a single bound, that bit of sleigth of mind certainly must have posed no difficulty for you. You don't see the conceit in questioning the bona fides of another christian's faith or in demanding that your conclusion that abortion is murder be the conclusion that all must reach? Again, you make the point perfectly. Your argument on abortion in a nutshell is that what you believe is the correct belief and the only belief, so much so that even firebombing clinics is defensible. All who disagree condone baby murdering. End of story, end of thought. I disagree with you and in so doing, all I really said on the issue was that I was against fire bombing clinics. From that you leapt to my not being christian enough and a baby murder fan to boot. And in all of that you see no conceit, not a drop of "Holier than thou?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 You questioned how a christian could beleive as I. I won't even get into how you convert my opposition to firebombing clinics to one where I condone the murder of children. Given your ability to leap synaptic canyons in a single bound, that bit of sleigth of mind certainly must have posed no difficulty for you. You don't see the conceit in questioning the bona fides of another christian's faith or in demanding that your conclusion that abortion is murder be the conclusion that all must reach? Again, you make the point perfectly. Your argument on abortion in a nutshell is that what you believe is the correct belief and the only belief, so much so that even firebombing clinics is defensible. All who disagree condone baby murdering. End of story, end of thought. I disagree with you and in so doing, all I really said on the issue was that I was against fire bombing clinics. From that you leapt to my not being christian enough and a baby murder fan to boot. And in all of that you see no conceit, not a drop of "Holier than thou?" 543451[/snapback] You call these people "false christians". Yet they fight for a cause that God and Jesus believed was the worst sin of all? Who are you to call them "false christians" and then get your feathers ruffled when I question anyone who tries to call themself a Christian (note it is capitalized), who condons the murder of children. Since your memory is failing this is your quote questioning other christians, "Not that anyone around here ever sounds even faintly like these false christians". You maybe a "better Christian" then me. However, you do condon baby murder, and you did just lie about saying these are false Christians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted December 27, 2005 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] Congratulations! You have now achieved BF status with that f***ed up logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Congratulations! You have now achieved BF status with that f***ed up logic. 543468[/snapback] In your opinon. I believe there are many others who would disagree. What other reason would he have had to attack them, other then to put them out of business? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 In your opinon. I believe there are many others who would disagree. What other reason would he have had to attack them, other then to put them out of business? 543472[/snapback] Uh, perhaps to get them out of the temple? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 You could have just wrote "I surrender" or "I have nothing useful to say". Shorter and conveys the same point. 543433[/snapback] you post something as unintelligable as this and think I have nothing useful to say? that is classic. actually no...i take that back. it isn't classic at all. just typical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 You call these people "false christians". Yet they fight for a cause that God and Jesus believed was the worst sin of all?... 543454[/snapback] You see, the problem I have with this logic is that they are trying to replace someone else's right with their religious views. Why should someone who doesn't believe or believe in the same thing have their rights infringed upon? This question applies to more than just abortion. No, I don't want to hear the Christains (note the capitalization) are in the majority crap. You would have your panties in a wad if you were in the minority and the majority was trying to do it to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Hamilton Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 unless VA was referred to as "their" i think you are wrong on this one. 543394[/snapback] Here's what I said. He was using those wacko's own literature (the Bible) to point out an inherent contradiction in their [the Army of God freaks'] thinking. Mickey doesn't have to buy their logic to do that; he's just noting the inconsistency in their own thinking. I injected the brackets to be clear. I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that Mickey was both refuting VABills and the Army of God folks. Either way, in no instance did I refer to the Bible as wacko. It's the Army of God people that are seriously messed up, and VABills is moderately so. As to your high moral ground a few posts ago calling me one of the board intellectuals who feel free to insult the Bible, get off your high horse: I don't disparage the Bible. You know little if anything about my spiritual life so stop this moral superiority BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Here's what I said.I injected the brackets to be clear. I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that Mickey was both refuting VABills and the Army of God folks. Either way, in no instance did I refer to the Bible as wacko. It's the Army of God people that are seriously messed up, and VABills is moderately so. As to your high moral ground a few posts ago calling me one of the board intellectuals who feel free to insult the Bible, get off your high horse: I don't disparage the Bible. You know little if anything about my spiritual life so stop this moral superiority BS. 543502[/snapback] don't presume to know what i presume to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 There's also a passage where God sends bears to rip apart 40 kids who are making fun of a bald guy. 2 Kings 2:23-24: 543405[/snapback] It is not nice to tease bald guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Uh, perhaps to get them out of the temple? 543493[/snapback] 14 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: 15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables; 16 And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise. Again, VABills, when they start doing abortions in churches, then maybe this will apply... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Start a thread with Jesus, abortion, firebombing, and homosexuality in the first paragraph and wait for ferment... 543435[/snapback] Helps pass a Tuesday when the rest of the city seems to have the day off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted December 27, 2005 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] uhhh - I am speachless. Ok, so it is ok to bomb a clinic if no body is killed. However, isn't it forseeable that someone may be killed or hurt, whether intended or not, as a result of a large explosion in a populated area? Wow. I never had much regard for any of your opinions before - but now, you are the first I have ever thought of using the "ignore" function on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 You call these people "false christians". Yet they fight for a cause that God and Jesus believed was the worst sin of all? Who are you to call them "false christians" and then get your feathers ruffled when I question anyone who tries to call themself a Christian (note it is capitalized), who condons the murder of children. Since your memory is failing this is your quote questioning other christians, "Not that anyone around here ever sounds even faintly like these false christians". You maybe a "better Christian" then me. However, you do condon baby murder, and you did just lie about saying these are false Christians. 543454[/snapback] If I had not called them "false" I would have been besieged with complaints that I was lumping all christians with these lunatics giving advise on how to best launch molotov cocktails. Thus I injected the qualifier to avoid tagging christians on this board with the actions of those people. Little did I know that you see yourself as one them and hence find the "false christian" label I aimed at them, not you, to be offensive to you because you identify with them. Why do you keep saying that I "condon [sic] baby murder". How exactly do you leap from being against firebombing to therefore being in favor of murdering babies? Again, you just keep making the point for me, over and over. You have decided what is right and wrong and want to force it on to the rest of us and all who disagree, to any extent, are condoning baby murder. At the very heart of it, that is the basic argument of many people in the so-called pro-life movement. They have made a decision as to what is right and wrong and they will tolerate no dissent on the issue and are dedicated to using the law to force their beliefs on to everyone else. There is conceit there on so many levels. They understand the Bible better, are better Christians and on top of all that, they are saving babies from slaughter. What a wonderful self image of purity, courage an righteousness that conceit must paint for them. Appeals to delusions of self importance are always effective. What could be a more compelling, more persuasive tactic than to convince another that they are destined to save mudered babies? You can tell how well you are doing in an argument with them by the number of times they call you a baby killer. When they run out of ideas, that is the cudgel they go back to over and over. Again, you are a perfect example and I have to thank you for the assist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 uhhh - I am speachless. Ok, so it is ok to bomb a clinic if no body is killed. However, isn't it forseeable that someone may be killed or hurt, whether intended or not, as a result of a large explosion in a populated area? Wow. I never had much regard for any of your opinions before - but now, you are the first I have ever thought of using the "ignore" function on. 543538[/snapback] That is why I thought that particular post, the firebombing Jesus one, would be a good candidate for pinning, just so no one thinks I made it up. Really, I thought that was one post where everyone would pretty much agree. I didn't anticipate that firebombing and the "Godhatesfags.com" folks would have any fans here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 In your opinon. I believe there are many others who would disagree. 543472[/snapback] Lets name some of those people who agree with you: - - - - Well, I couldn't think of anyone. Maybe Eric Rudolph? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeseburger_in_paradise Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 It was 42, get your facts straight. Secondly, the story, is about Elisha who while being taunted about being bald was in fact being kept from spreading the word to the people of Bethal, which was a center of sin at the time. Hence God removed the "road block" and Elisha went on to teach on Mount Carmel. But go ahead and change the facts to suit your need again. 543412[/snapback] Children? Mount Carmel? Wacko? Hmm... this all sounds familiar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 That is why I thought that particular post, the firebombing Jesus one, would be a good candidate for pinning, just so no one thinks I made it up. Really, I thought that was one post where everyone would pretty much agree. I didn't anticipate that firebombing and the "Godhatesfags.com" folks would have any fans here. 543548[/snapback] I am truly dumfounded by VABills. I would like to know if he is consistant. If it is OK for christians to conduct nonlethal firebombings of clinics because of their sinfull ways, i.e. "abortion (killing)," then is it ok for christians to conduct non-lethal firebombings of Courts for condemning someone to death (killing)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted December 27, 2005 Author Share Posted December 27, 2005 Again, VABills, when they start doing abortions in churches, then maybe this will apply... 543514[/snapback] What is with the dove selling? Was the dove market a major thing back then? Were they the pornagraphers of their day or something? Of all the things to make it into the Bible, the holiest book in Christendom. Dove merchants? Can you imagine the conversation when Matthew is trying to remember what happened years later and write it down or whoever it was writing it down? "Let me see now, what kind of merchants were there? Well, there had to be moneychangers, afterall, what is a market without moneychangers after all. What else though, what other merchants were there....hmmmm.....Oh, oh, oh, I remember now, doves, there were lots and lots of doves. Big sale, huge sale on pidgeons, lines around the temple, everyone looking for a good deal on a pidgeon." It's like a Monty Python skit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts