His4Life

I know it doesn't, but it does talk about God's judgment of sinners. This is in many books - Revelation, Daniel, and Christ spoke of it. The verse I'm thinking of is in Daniel. It says that on the last day ("judgment day") many will rise, some to everlasting life, and others to shame and everlasting contempt. The word for "shame" means "homosexual shame" and alludes to sodomy. In ancient cultures, prisoners of war were often sodomized by the triumphant king and his army as a means of humiliation. That's the picture that Daniel is trying to paint of the fate of the unsaved.

11/3/2011 8:28:24 PM

His4Life

I know it doesn't, but it does talk about God's judgment of sinners. This is in many books - Revelation, Daniel, and Christ spoke of it. The verse I'm thinking of is in Daniel. It says that on the last day ("judgment day") many will rise, some to everlasting life, and others to shame and everlasting contempt. The word for "shame" means "homosexual shame" and alludes to sodomy. In ancient cultures, prisoners of war were often sodomized by the triumphant king and his army as a means of humiliation. That's the picture that Daniel is trying to paint of the fate of the unsaved.

11/3/2011 8:29:06 PM

His4Life

Hm, my comment didn't appear.

11/3/2011 8:31:12 PM

Anon-e-moose

@Troll/Poe/Nuts4Life

'Interpretation'. The usual excuse for fundies putting things in the Bible that were never there, or taking their own context out of context. Revelation 22:18-19 forbids that. If it doesn't directly say 'they will be anally raped', then it doesn't actually mean that, or was plain simple language too difficult for God? - if it was him who actually wrote the Bible himself, that is; nope, not seeing 'Written by God' on the cover...!

'shame and everlasting contempt'? Yeah, I'm sure an anagram program will be able to make 'Anally raped by demons for eternity' out of that, I'm sure. [/hyper-sarcasm] And 'allude'? Just a pathetic excuse for twisting words to mean what they never did. Like I say, God must find plain, simple language so difficult! [/mega-sarcasm]

I wonder what the result would be, if people representing the Plain English Campaign were to do a 'Plain English' version of the Bible, 'Crystal Mark' award and all...? No 'fable', 'metaphor' or 'allusion' allowed. The Jefferson Bible. It exists for a reason.

Oh, and as for:

"And please stop with the 'anal fixation' nonsense."

Isn't that a bit rich coming from you, considering...:

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=67654&Page=7

@His4Life

"You'll have all the evidence you need when the flames start shooting up your heiney."


http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=73407&Page=2

@His4Life

"I'll be fucked before I let me kids go to see this shit. If I ever find my children reading a Harry Potter book, they're going to find that book halfway up their heineys. I don't care how old they are."


http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=77438&Page=3

@His4Life

"Also, I strongly disagree with the idea that faith or belief is good no matter what religion you follow. The Bible makes it clear that there is truth and there is the lie, there is a path that leads to God, and a path that leads to damnation. Believing in anything is silly, it is the object of your belief that matters. It's a matter of spending eternity in Heaven with Christ or spending eternity with Satan sizing up your doody hole in hell down below. That simple."


http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=77605&Page=4

@His4Life

"AnoneMoose, I'm seriously starting to hope the devil pops a hard one off in your sorry ass before you get tossed into the flames."


http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=82068&Page=2

@His4Life

"I'm sure they'll enjoy bending over for the devil..."


http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=82696&Page=6

@His4Life

"As for AnoneMoose, I am done conversing with you. You've proven time and again to be a waste of time. Enjoy taking it in the meatsack from the devil."


http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=84228&Page=4

@His4Life

"Once again I have no idea what you're talking about. Enjoy taking it in the ass on judgment day."


http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=83181&Page=4

@His4Life

"Bend over, Anon-e-Moose. Your master Satan is calling."


Which brings us right up to date:


http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=84511&Page=5

@His4Life

"And to answer your question, yes, Atheists are the ones going to hell, to spend eternity having their putty holes plugged by the devil. Have fun, creep."


http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=84310&Page=3

@His4Life

"What's so despairing about my lifestyle? I'm going to heaven to live for eternity with Christ. What have you got to look forward to? Spreading your buttcheeks for the devil's amusement?

'Knowing Anonymoose, you're probably looking forward to getting sodomized on judgment day. Pervert.'

'In modern English, we would write this statement "and some will take it in the butt and become an object of contempt." This is gross, but it is Biblical"

And therefore proof that God himself is obsessed with teh buttsecks too - even though he's supposed to consider it an 'abomination' Unthinkable.. If God created all things, then he created those particular homoerotic artworks, and not Tom of Finland.

So there you have it: not only has Troll/Poe/Nuts4Life fallen into an argumental - and logical - trap of her own making, so has God too. And therefore exposed their own latency towards that which they claim to 'hate', when actually they love it. Otherwise, they wouldn't give homosexuality a second thought, just like the vast majority of people.

Finally, I refer you to that last link, thus:

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=67911&Page=3

@His4Life

"wow, I think I'vebeen on this board too long."

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=67911&Page=4

@#1068535 (emphasis added)

'wow, I think I'vebeen on this board too long'

"There's a fairly easy fix for that, you know."

Your call. Unless you want to admit the only reason why you post here in FSTDT, is not because you want to be an apologist for all the fundies we've quoted, but purely because you're a sad, pitiful attention-seeker with dissociative identity disorder. After all, just show me a quote - least of all a post - by a Quaker here in FSTDT. Just one. Go ahead. If you can.

...oh yes, that's right. There isn't. Because they don't need to push their beliefs on everyone else. Because they're secure in their beliefs. That means psychologically too. They're not attention-seekers with a mental disturbance-based obsession about their beliefs, like that of fundies; an obsession that overrides all other things in their lives to the exception of one. Sure, they make such beliefs a part of their lives, but they never allow such to rule their lives. Unlike fundies, however. There's a word to describe their particular psychological disorder: Monomania.

And as proven time and again - and not just via you, dearie: fundies have an obsession about homosexuals and their activities in private, more than homosexuals themselves. The above quotes by you prove it.

Just as preacher Ted Faggard vehemently denounced homosexuals & their activities, but was later exposed as one, by your own admission you have subconscious desires to be cornholed by a lesbian with a strapon. You don't even have the right to deny it. One doesn't need to be a psychology major to figure you out, dearie. Freud, Kinsey, Masters & Johnson, Krafft-Ebing et al were right all along.

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=82696&Page=6

@GigaGuess

"@His4Life
What is it with you fire and brimstone types and your anal fixation? Seriously, I know power bottoms who aren't as ass obsessed as you folks are!"


http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=83496&Page=3

@His4Life

"You guys are being unduly harsh to me because I am a believer in Christ. I admitted my idiotic mistake in making a crude comment and then trying to cover it up afterwards, but that does not mean I'm not a Christian or doing my best to follow Jesus. I'm sorry - the comment was out of line and my attempt to lie and cover it up was even more inappropriate. However, the second comment about the erection was truly not from me, and you are welcome to trace the IP address to prove it. There is a difference in that while the first comment was me spouting off in frustration, the second is clearly someone attempting to make me look stupid. Obviously I know that the question about evolution and wood is not about a man's penis, and I do not believe and never have believed that the Bible teaches that it is a sin for a man to have an erection. That is absolutely ridiculous.

Yes, I have damaged my credibility here and I deserve your rebuke. However, my comment, while an exaggeration, was biblically based, as the Book of Daniel does teach that the unsaved will be sodomized on the day of judgmenet. The second comment (about "wood") was not biblically based and was nonsensical.

I am sorry. I know who and what I am - a wretch in the eyes of God, even though a wretch forgiven - and I am woman enough to admit it. I hope you can forgive me. I don't think there is anything more I can say or do in relation to your comment, anon-e-moose."

(quote): "I hope you can forgive me", eh? Okay then. Despite your previous behaviour that has demonstrated you're nothing more than a drama-creating troll, and an attention-seeker with psychological issues, I'm willing to forgive you, as per your request. But with just one non-negotiable condition:

Leave FSTDT, and never darken this site's HTML code again. Ever.

It's the only possible way you'll be truly forgiven, if you're being truly honest as a 'saved' Christian is always supposed to be, 24/7/365 (lest they are hell-damned, despite any claims by them to the contrary; 'Grace by Faith Only'. 'OSAS', and all that jazz. Remember: Revelation 21:8). Like I say: your call.

And don't you dare try and worm your way out by saying 'I don't understand you!', your usual pathetic evasion tactic.

11/4/2011 8:12:52 AM

Anon

>>The verse I'm thinking of is in Daniel. It says that on the last day ("judgment day") many will rise, some to everlasting life, and others to shame and everlasting contempt. The word for "shame" means "homosexual shame" and alludes to sodomy<<

At the risk of feeding the troll:

You are either lying or incredibly mistaken.

Five seconds on Google and five minutes reading the commentaries on Daniel 12:2 compiled by Biblos.com informs me that the word you are referring to is "?????" ("hrpvt" in modern Romanization - note the absence of vowels in Old Hebrew) in the Masoretic text (this part of the book is written in Hebrew, while large portions of the middle are in Aramaic).

"?????"/"hrpvt" translates in modern Hebrew as "abuse" and the commentaries variously describe it as shame/mockery/public derision. There is nothing in this section at all related to any particular sexual conduct

Even accepting your premise that that section of the last chapter of the Book of Daniel should be read as a description of the afterlife, Your Argument Is Invalid

(but thank you for illustrating the problem inherent in what Schlafly is doing)


Edit: Apparently, I can't type Hebrew characters and have them appear here. That's annoying.

11/4/2011 9:30:17 AM

Anon-e-moose

@Anon

(emphasis added):

"hrpvt" translates in modern Hebrew as "abuse" and the commentaries variously describe it as shame/mockery/public derision. There is nothing in this section at all related to any particular sexual conduct

Your Argument Is Invalid"

Well, there you have it. And despite the no doubt denial/evasions we'll get in return, one can't deny facts (Fact: Troll/Poe/Nuts4Life isn't a Bible scholar of decades of study, thus she doesn't know what she's talking about). And the fact is this: In trying to twist meanings/'allusions', call them what you will in the Bible, hrpvt = abuse; shame/mockery/public derision, makes absolutely no mention - directly, as in plain language - of actual malexmale rape, And isn't that act supposed to be utterly forbidden in the Bible, under any & all circumstances?

...ah, but then, God doesn't even condemn abortion, despite the protestations to the contrary by fundie 'pro-lifers'. When their own 'Word of God' gives the lie (emphasis added):

Hosea 13:16: 'Samaria will be held guilty, For she has rebelled against her God. They will fall by the sword, Their little ones will be dashed in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open.'

God aborted the first child born to David via Bathsheba. How many pregnant women must have miscarried as a result of the plagues God wrought upon Egypt? And how many pregnant women drowned in the 'Flood'...?

Hypocrisy, thy name is 'God of Unconditional* Love'

The only shame/mockery/public derision you talk about, dearie, is being pointed and laughed at.



And then you wonder why you say "You guys are being unduly harsh to me"?

And because you are a believer in Christ' isn't the reason; anyone whose words, actions and thoughts are made of pure FAIL deserves only shame/mockery/public derision by being pointed & laughed at, until they admit their FAIL, and change their way of thinking until they no longer FAIL.

You say, re. we commenters in FSTDT: "You guys are being unduly harsh to me". Well, like I say, there's a simple solution to that: leave FSTDT forever.

...or become an anti-fundie commenter, like the non-fundie Christian commenters here in FSTDT. Like I say: your call.

*- Free Offer! God's Unconditional Love!

Terms and Conditions apply.

No thanks. Want me to be 'saved', God (if he exists)? I want absolutely no strings attached; seeing as he can't keep to his own moral standards, thus proving he is inferior. Ergo, Atheism. QED.

11/4/2011 9:58:30 AM

Anon-e-moose

You say "You guys are being unduly harsh to me". Here is the reason why:

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=84623&Page=2

Read the quote by someone from the Ruptured Retards forum, then this by one of my fellow commenters:

@Pule Thamex

"It seems that your faith has no power other than to enable the glib spouting of lies and the easy manifestation of inhuman, often demonic, characteristics."

In just one statement does he say it all, nay, hit the nail on the head, about why you - and all other fundies like you - say what you do. Then you wonder why, after you say what you have, and not expect to have such, as well as it's speaker, to be subject to hrpvt = abuse, shame/mockery/public derision by being pointed and laughed at; also why FSTDT exists, and it's raison d'etre?!

Therefore, to borrow a quote from one of the "Star Wars" films: That is why you FAIL.

After all: just find for me a quote in FSTDT's archives by a Quaker. Just one. Then you do the maths, when you can't. PROTIP: there are Christians who are commenters here too.

11/5/2011 11:18:50 AM

His4Life

The Hebrew word for "abuse" there has a broad range of meanings, but was used in the ancient world to describe the widespread practice of sodomizing prisoners of war after a battle. This practice was more common in pagan cultures than in Israelite culture, since the Israelites were to keep themselves pure and homosexual sodomy was forbidden.

It's not that God 'approves' of sodomy or that it's not an abomination. In the context of Daniel, sinners are abandoned to their fate because of their rejection of God. It's clear from the context that this judgment is public and their shame and humiliation will be on display for all to see. This will include both men and women, so the punishment is not exclusively homosexual. The idea of "public shame and derision" certainly applies. These unsaved souls will then be cast into the lake fire, so it's important to remember that the "shame" described in this passage is only one aspect of our fate if we choose to die without knowing Christ.

11/5/2011 1:41:13 PM

Anon

@His4Life: Using the vocabulary of Wikipedia: Citation Needed on all of your statements about the meaning of the text. Your statements are getting increasingly bizarre and outrageous, so you will have to provide the evidence to support them.

I again refer you to all of the commentaries and translators notes compiled by Biblos.com for the meaning of that section, which say that it does not contain anything like what you say it does. As an example: if the word has a wide variety of meanings, even if one of those is the meaning you ascribe, how can you say that that's what it means in that phrase?

And I don't have anything else to say about this, since I am not a scholar of Biblical Hebrew, Aramaiac, or any of the other original languages used in composing the Bible.

So - thank you again for illustrating the problem with Schlafly's translation methods. And I am done.

11/5/2011 7:33:26 PM

His4Life

"And I don't have anything else to say about this, since I am not a scholar of Biblical Hebrew, Aramaiac, or any of the other original languages used in composing the Bible."

So what are your grounds for making statements about what the Bible does or doesn't mean? To a reader living in the era in which the Bible was written, the unpleasant meaning of the verse was plain as day. They would have heard it and said "oh, that's what happened when the Assyrians sacked our city, or when the Babylonians carried us away captive."

Anyway, this isn't a fun topic, so why not just bury the hatchet and move on? I'd much rather talk about God's love and grace than his wrath. Since obviously you've studied the Bible a little bit, just curious - what do you know about God's love and grace?

11/5/2011 8:31:23 PM

Anon

>>So what are your grounds for making statements about what the Bible does or doesn't mean? <<

I have checked the statements of various people with the necessary expertise, and cited my sources.

>>To a reader living in the era in which the Bible was written, the unpleasant meaning of the verse was plain as day. <<

Again: Citation Needed. You have not provided any evidence that the verse means what you said it means (or even to counter the evidence provided for other interpretations), and now you've added another unsupported statement about the mindset of the original readers of the document.

In fact, there is no way that that statement can be true as you have typed it, because there was no one era in which the Bible was written. The current text is a compilation of a bunch of older documents composed over hundreds of years and in many different languages. In this particular case, Wikipedia informs me that there is debate about where and when the Book of Daniel was composed, with estimates of when ranging over four centuries.

With regards to your last point: I do not believe in the God that you say you believe in, and I have no desire in debating theology here. I simply wanted to show that your arguments don't hold together, even accepting your premises. You should re-think them - both the logic, and the premises themselves.

And now I am done.

11/5/2011 8:58:10 PM

Anon-e-moose

@Troll/Poe/Nuts4Life

"The Hebrew word for "abuse" there has a broad range of meanings"

And that is why you FAIL.

Direct statements of 'abuse = rape' in the Bible, or both you and your book of fairytales FAIL in perpetuity, and therefore can never justify their existence.

Why couldn't God have stated in plain language in his own 'Word of God' which of course, he wrote himself: "Men having sex with each other is wrong under any & all circumstances, except for when there's nothing wrong with such, because I'm the 'do as I say, not as I do' kind of deity, because I'm the 'God of Love' who kills unborn babies, and all that jazz!"?

You tell me. Just before you try to explain to me why I'm supposed to worship, nay, believe in this so-called 'deity' of yours, without compromising my own moral superiority...?:



(PROTIP: The ten killed by Satan were only under the specific authorisation of God. As I've to kill so much as just one person to date, nor do I want to ever, I guess I must be going wrong somewhere, re. my own morality...?! [/hyper-sarcasm] God. The ultimate kid pouring boiling water into his ant farm.)

...and if you come out with 'Oh, but the Bible is the inspired Word of God', then you've annihilated not just your argument, but finally admitted that it wasn't directly authored by God (so this 'omnipotent' God can poof a universe world & animal life on it into existence, but he can't publish his own books...?!), but by errant, flawed, imperfect men. As schizophrenic and dissociative identity disorder-afflicted as it's 'believers', never mind having ideas above their stations - in thinking that they could ever justify coming up with such BS fairytales in the first place.

Thus the quote by Nietzsche 'A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.' proves he was right all along. Like I say: Joan of Arc would have been put in a nut farm today.

Fundamentalist Christianity. The ultimate mental handicap. Your own (past) behaviour proves that. So why should anything you say have the right to be acknowledged as fact, never mind listened to, again...?

Oh, one more thing: just consider what this particular thread is about: Andy Schaftafly's Conservative Bible Project. Would you consider him to be mentally handicapped in his own justifications for contravening Revelation 22:18-19? Then consider what he would then say to you to justify what he's doing to your 'Word of God', and his use of 'broad range of meanings', especially considering his motives in what he's doing...?

Meanwhile, we sane Atheists who consider both your 'KJV/NIV/whatever', and his 'CBP' to be one and the same: fairytales that can never justify their existences, will fetch the beer & popcorn, and watch the Fundie Fight...! >:D

Just keep proving we Atheists right, every time you post here in FSTDT, dearie. If you want to prove us wrong however, and think you've won the argument, you know what to do: leave FSTDT forever.

No evasion tactics by you allowed. In perpetuity.

--EDIT--

@Troll/Poe/Nuts4Life

"My pastor is a Union Theological Seminary graduate"

Okay. Now what do you personally know about the subject...? If you're not personally a Union Theological Seminary graduate, speaking and reading Aramaic, Hebrew and Biblical Greek; a Ph.D, then isn't anything you say - certainly on this issue, without help from anyone else - being off-topic? What do you know on the subject, based on your own decades of research...? Therefore, to reiterate what Anon says above: not only is your argument invalid, but everything you say on any subject/issue. Then you wonder why we consider it a bit rich of you, when you claim to know more on the subject than we do...?

Hypocrisy, thy name is sheeple fundie.

"your post is off topic and I don't know what you're talking to yourself about."

Evasion tactics not allowed. And more lies. If you keep saying 'I don't know', I don't understand you' ad infinitum, ad nauseam, then you admit you know nothing on any subject. Period. Your prime evasion tactic.

"I'm not really interested in arguing with you."

And here we have the ultimate evasion tactic. If you're not interested in arguing the toss - and the only answers you can provide is via your pastor spoon-feeding his own subjective opinions on Bible scripture:



Then you might as well have him replace you on FSTDT, seeing as you're nothing more than an attention-seeking troll with psychological issues, who - via admitting you know nothing on the matter - has finally admitted she has absolutely nothing to contribute to a proper debate.

And thus do you reveal your hand, troll. If you're true to yourself, then as you say (quote): 'I'm not really interested in arguing with you.'

So I guess that also applies to everyone in FSTDT, nay, the site as a whole. If you're 'not really interested', as you claim; or is that just another lie? If not, well then: go.

And never come back, if you don't want to admit you're just an attention-seeking troll with proven psychological issues (otherwise, you'd make like a Quaker and never be interested in the business of other people; secure in your beliefs). Because by your continuing to post here, do you prove we Atheists right.

11/6/2011 8:14:44 AM

His4Life

My pastor is a Union Theological Seminary graduate, speaks and reads Aramaic, Hebrew and Biblical Greek, and has given entire sermons on the connection between the word we're discussing and the practice of sodomy in ancient cultures. He has a PhD. Of course you're just going dismiss him, because he's a pastor and not a secular, atheistic scholar teaching at a university somewhere.

Anon-e-moose, as usual, your post is off topic and I don't know what you're talking to yourself about. Are you asking me if I believe the Bible is inspired? Yes. I also believe it is inerrant. Obviously you don't agree, and that's ok, that's your belief. I'm not really interested in arguing with you.

11/6/2011 10:40:36 AM

His4Life

Are saying that you want me to ask my pastor to post here??

11/6/2011 1:47:51 PM

His4Life

And what is your thing with Quakers? Are you a Quaker? I respect some of what Quakers believe, but they are one of the most liberal churches (theologically and socially) and most do not use the Bible in worship. It's not surprising they're not quoted here.

11/6/2011 1:50:50 PM

His4Life

And what is your thing with Quakers? Are you a Quaker? I respect some of what Quakers believe, but they are one of the most liberal churches (theologically and socially) and most do not use the Bible in worship. It's not surprising they're not quoted here.

11/6/2011 4:02:15 PM

Anon-e-moose

@Troll/Poe/Nuts4Life

"Are saying that you want me to ask my pastor to post here??"

Yes. He clearly knows infinitely more than you do on the subject of Bible 'interpretation' than you ever will. Like I (and fellow commenter Anon) says, the fact you're reduced to getting your knowledge second-hand from a non-objective, non-unbiased source (who, no doubt like you, has the same right-wing, bile-tinted spectacled view of LGBT people, who 'interprets the Bible to suit his own attitudes):



Means that you can't even possibly justify your being here in FSTDT, never mind whatever you say on this (or any other) particular issue. When the simple fact is this: Gays are legal. Their very existence is legal. The intimate activities of gay people in private are legal. Gay marriage is legal. Prop. 8 is illegal. As is DADT.

Romans 13:1-5 says that the likes of you are going to Hell for refusing to agree with the law. Thus the Bible itself is illegal, for it's anti-gay statements. God is disobeying his own law.

"but they are one of the most liberal churches (theologically and socially)"

By jove, I do believe she's nearly got it! Now, just jump up a little, and the point will no longer be over your head, dearie.

How many Quakers are in the GOP? How many Quakers lobby Congress, etc? How many Quakers insinuate themselves into the political system, hoping to force their own Theocratic Dominionist agenda upon people who don't want such in the first place? How many Quakers are there quoted here in FSTDT, unjustifiably using psychological blackmail techniques, threats etc, to unjustifiably force their 'beliefs' on everyone else; 'Turn or Burn', and all that jazz; or worse...?

You tell me. Then mayhaps you'll get the point (mainly why I have no problem with Quakers & their ilk). And why you, a proven, nay, admitted liar, and proven attention-seeker with dissociative identity disorder, is nothing more than a troll - and therefore everything you say is invalid.

'The existence of a 'God' (certainly without proof to my satisfaction)? Invalid.
The existence of a 'soul'? Invalid.
'An afterlife'? Invalid.
'Heaven'? Invalid.
'Hell'? Invalid.
'Being anally raped by demons for eternity', as you keep trying to claim? Invalid.
The above happening, via the vaguest of 'interpretative' references in a book of fairytales? Invalid.

...unless this pastor of yours can come here and explain such, without reference to the Bible itself, nor using his own biased right-wing 'interpretation', but purely by peer-reviewed, non-religious, objective written sources.

...or is this 'pastor' you speak of a lie too, and you're getting your answers purely via Google? Considering your long track record of mendacity, I really don't know what to believe about you anymore. As whatever liars say is invalid, therefore there's no point in you being here anymore, as whatever you say has no justifications. Ever, thus you're a waste of time.

Besides...:

http://www.fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=50176&Page=5

...someone else has taken over your position, and is out-trolling you. You - and everything you can possibly say - is therefore irrelevant. Pointless. Now leave.

11/7/2011 9:20:35 AM

His4Life

I have no idea what you're talking about at this point. Since when was this discussion even about gay and lesbian people? My pastor is actually more tolerant towards gays than I am. I don't see what that has to do with the topic we're discussing.

11/7/2011 6:23:34 PM

Anon-e-moose

@Troll/Poe/Nuts4Life

"I have no idea what you're talking about at this point."

Evasion tactic. Invalid.

"Since when was this discussion even about gay and lesbian people?"

You did, re. 'being taken up the butt by demons for eternity' being vaguely 'interpreted' in the Bible. And not just here, neither. Ergo your own anal fixation, when the Bible doesn't even say so directly. Proof of your mental instability/selective amnesia. Evasion tactic. Invalid.


"My pastor is actually more tolerant towards gays than I am."

Which is why he should replace you here. He's clearly more of a Christian than [i[you'll[/i] ever be. The fact he's more tolerant than you? I like him already...!

"I don't see what that has to do with the topic we're discussing."

You're so poisoned by your own unjustifiable way of thinking, especially with your proven serial mendacity, trolling behaviour, and obvious mental handicaps, that everything you say & think is invalid. But then, just ask the person being quoted in this actual discussion thread - which has everything to do with the topic, including what you're on about, re. 'interpretation' (certainly reinterpretation) of the Bible. Because like you, dearie, Andy Schaftafly...:

'In technical terminology... [s]he's a loon.'

-Dr. Silberman (Earl Boen), "The Terminator".

And as anything you say has no right to be considered credible (when you lie all the time), a question: what makes you think you should be here in FSTDT, other than admitting in all but word that you're nothing more than a troll with psychological issues; proven by your being an attention-seeker by being here?

But then, why not go to Conservapedia and tell Andy himself that what he's doing is wrong, certainly re. Revelation 22:18-19, and his own 're-interpretation' of the Bible. Then I wonder what would happen...?

Then you'd discover why you're here. Because you're a mentally handicapped attention-seeker, who would have been banned before now, because of your behaviour - if this were a conventional forum. Go to Conservapedia, Troll/Poe/Nuts4Life, and prove me - and Andy Schaftafly - wrong. If you dare, that is.

...oh, and if you dare say 'I have no idea what you're talking about at this point' again, that proves you're a liar. As well as being a liar, you also admit that you have an IQ of 0, therefore proving you're a moron too. And everything a moron says is invalid. Proof?:

"I'm not really interested in arguing with you."

"I have no idea what you're talking about at this point"

You said it, I didn't. Therefore a 'God' doesn't exist. An 'afterlife' doesn't exist; neither does a 'soul', nor a 'Heaven' or 'Hell', for that matter. Thus whatever you claim, re. 'demons' and whatever you 'think' they'll do to us, you have no right whatsoever to say to the contrary. A moron like you can't understand anything, therefore you're not qualified to even so much as have an 'opinion' on this - or any other - matter, never mind expect to be listened to anymore.

You can't even provide any extra-Biblical proof to the contrary, to prove me wrong. Because using the Bible itself to prove the Bible is invalid.

Therefore your religion is invalid. And as is anything you say invalid (thus your right to be listened to is invalid), your being here in FSTDT is also invalid. Unless you'd care to prove otherwise. To my satisfaction, that is.

11/8/2011 7:58:43 AM

His4Life

Why do I have to prove anything to *your* satisfaction? Who are you and why should I care?

11/8/2011 7:57:28 PM

Anon-e-moose

Troll/Poe/Nuts4Life

"Why do I have to prove anything to *your* satisfaction?"

Because if you can't, then - not taking into account the fact you're a lying, trolling retard who doesn't have the ability to have a coherent thought to be able to have an 'opinion', least of all show me credible evidence (and no, not using the Bible to explain the Bible) - then all your claims are invalid.

"Who are you and why should I care?"

You care enough to keep posting here in FSTDT, least of all this particular thread. Why, one would think that... you're not secure in your beliefs!? The Quakers don't care about secularism, nor how Atheism is on the increase, nor how homosexuality is accepted today. Because they don't feel threatened in the first place. They're not insecure*. Thus they don't need to 'speak out' on matters that don't affect them in any way - least of all push their beliefs - on an internet-based comment site. They don't particularly care, nor need to show concern about FSTDT, and why should they - unlike you

...unless of course, you'd care to prove otherwise. And leave FSTDT for good.

*- If Andy Schaftafly as secure in his beliefs, he wouldn't bother with his 'CBP' 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it'. That phrase exists for a reason. But then, 'Reason' is an alien concept to right-wing fundies. Otherwise, they wouldn't be right-wing fundies in the first place.

They'd be Quakers. Buddhists. Sufi Muslims (my physician is one. A very intellectual chap he is). Even Unitarian Universalists. You have one of the latter to thank for the ability to post your BS here, dearie: Sir Tim Berners-Lee (he could've made trillions from his invention, the WWW. Instead, he gave it away for free, for the betterment of humanity. His invention has changed the world - and quicker - than your so-called 'Jesus' ever has).

11/9/2011 2:32:18 PM

Brain_In_A_Jar

Why do I have to prove anything to *your* satisfaction? Who are you and why should I care?

You tell us. You obviously do care and want to prove things to us, otherwise you wouldn't be here.

11/9/2011 2:52:48 PM

His4Life

Of course Quakers don't care about secularism. They don't have any skin in the game. They're pagans.

11/9/2011 5:55:11 PM

His4Life

What point are you asking me to prove, anyway? You asked me to provide evidence that the Bible teaches that sinners who die without grace will be humiliated through sodomy before being cast into the lake of fire. I cited the appropriate verse and backed it up with a clear and logical explanation of the cultural context and my reasons for believing that the verse alludes to this ancient practice. I also pointed out that this view is taught and accepted in at least one major seminary, which, incidentally, Union is considered one of the more liberal seminaries in the country.

Biblical cultures were not so much concerned with physical wellbeing as they were with honor and shame. Even today, sodomy is a common expression of public shame and derision in the middle east. For example: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/middle-east/111024/gaddafi-sodomized-video-gaddafi-sodomy

www.compassdirect.org/english/country/pakistan/18035


In the big sweep of the bible, the question of how people will be treated on judgment day isn't really that big of a theme. I'd much rather talk about God's grace or some of the good things in the Bible then dwell on this issue. I made my case for why I believe what I believe about the verse in context and I don't feel a need to continue discussing it.

11/9/2011 6:04:32 PM

His4Life

What point are you asking me to prove, anyway? You asked me to provide evidence that the Bible teaches that sinners who die without grace will be humiliated through sodomy before being cast into the lake of fire. I cited the appropriate verse and backed it up with a clear and logical explanation of the cultural context and my reasons for believing that the verse alludes to this ancient practice. I also pointed out that this view is taught and accepted in at least one major seminary, which, incidentally, Union is considered one of the more liberal seminaries in the country.

Biblical cultures were not so much concerned with physical wellbeing as they were with honor and shame. Even today, sodomy is a common expression of public shame and derision in the middle east. For example: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/middle-east/111024/gaddafi-sodomized-video-gaddafi-sodomy

www.compassdirect.org/english/country/pakistan/18035


In the big sweep of the bible, the question of how people will be treated on judgment day isn't really that big of a theme. I'd much rather talk about God's grace or some of the good things in the Bible then dwell on this issue. I made my case for why I believe what I believe about the verse in context and I don't feel a need to continue discussing it.

11/9/2011 9:31:14 PM