It is currently Mon Feb 24, 2025 5:06 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » GENERAL BULLSHIT SECTION » GENERAL DISCUSSION

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]



Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 13 of 20
  [ 571 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 20  Next
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
formerlyknownas
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2015 6:08 pm
Posts: 3717
Location: East of Eden
pizza_Place: Vito and Nick's
RFDC wrote:
The OT has nothing to do with Christianity?

Didn't Jesus himself say that He came not to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it?

Well, I think he means that Jews (and many others) would argue that the Hebrew Bible wasn't written and compiled with Christianity in mind. The writers were waiting for a Messiah, but Jesus was not quite the one.

Jesus and his followers decided that he was the fulfillment and reinterpreted it via that lens. The reinterpretation doesn't always work, but it was obviously persuasive to a lot of people.

_________________
rogers park bryan wrote:
This registered sex offender I regularly converse with on the internet just said something really stupid
Top
 Profile  
 
Baby McNown
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:36 am 
Don Tiny wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
formerlyknownas wrote:
denisdman wrote:
Seacrest you can't compare a human, even one considered a Prophet, to God. Muhammad was fighting tribal battles. He is "merely" a Prophet.

I don't know seventh century rules of war, but I doubt anyone back then followed the Geneva Conventions.

Edit: Would Moses be a better comparison for Muhammad?

Joshua. He led the holy war through Canaan.


Joe Maddon. He is the Prophet that leads the team put together by the son of God.

Captain Dathan wrote:
Shaka, When the Walls Fell

Darmak and Jalad at Tenagra.
Top
  
 
Bagels
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:10 pm
Posts: 32164
pizza_Place: Milano's
RFDC wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
I didn't say it had nothing to do with Christianity.



You didn't?

Seacrest wrote:
The OT has nothing to do with Christianity.


Looks to me like that is exactly what you said...



Image
Top
 Profile  
 
Seacrest
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:38 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38787
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Dignified Rube wrote:
The Law and prophecies of the OT is are the basis for Christianity, except for faith in Christ replacing adherence to the Law as a means to salvation.


I will correct my original statement. Thanks for pointing it out.

What i meant to say was the bad actions of those in the OT have nothing to do with Christianity.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.
Top
 Profile  
 
Baby McNown
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:39 am 
Seacrest wrote:
Dignified Rube wrote:
The Law and prophecies of the OT is are the basis for Christianity, except for faith in Christ replacing adherence to the Law as a means to salvation.


I will correct my original statement. Thanks for pointing it out.

What i meant to say was the bad actions of those in the OT have nothing to do with Christianity.

So are you dismissing the entire book of Leviticus then? That's not what Little Crest's priest would say to do....
Top
  
 
formerlyknownas
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2015 6:08 pm
Posts: 3717
Location: East of Eden
pizza_Place: Vito and Nick's
Dignified Rube wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Dignified Rube wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
The OT has nothing to do with Christianity. It is the history of the Jews before the arrival of Christ.


Seacrest, you were on a roll before these statements.

Wasn't Christ a Rabbi who followed the Ten Commandments and other Jewish law, including observance of the Sabbath, going back to Moses in the OT?

Remember that when the boy Jesus was at the Temple, he spent three days among the teachers. And "Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers." (Luke 2:47)

What about the prophecies of Christ's coming in the book of Isaiah, which Christ fulfilled, or the prophecy of the second coming of Elijah in Malachi Ch. 4 that Christ referred to, when he said "Elijah does indeed come and will restore all things." If the OT had nothing to do with Christianity, certainly Christ would not have made any reference to Elijah at all as the redeemer who comes before the great and terrible day of the Lord.


Christ was a carpenter, not a Rabbi.

Yes, I remember that.

There are 547 prophecies across the history of the Jews in the OT that foretold the coming of Christ.

I didn't say it had nothing to do with Christianity.

The law before Christ was the old law of the OT. The 10 commandments and other precepts. Imperfect in part because some of it came from man. Christ is the divine and perfect fulfillment of what was started in the OT, and completed by Him. "Love one another, As I have loved you"


Really, how about the story of Nicodemus, who called Jesus "Rabbi"?

"1 Now there came a man of the Pharisees whose name was Nicodemus, a member of the council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could do the miraculous signs that you do unless God were with him.”

John 3

Just a word for teacher. Not even translated as "rabbi" in many new English versions. Rabbinic Judaism didn't really get started until well after the destruction of the temple (70 AD). Like several hundred years later. (I think)

_________________
rogers park bryan wrote:
This registered sex offender I regularly converse with on the internet just said something really stupid
Top
 Profile  
 
Seacrest
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:40 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38787
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Seacrest wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:

If you think the concept that not delivering a pizza is in anyway similar to raping children and killing innocents well then I'm speechless.

Seacrest I know you and I have gone back and forth on religion for years now, but do you honestly just skip over the parts where I qualify the severity before asking the question? If you do then please just exit from religious debates.

Also if you don't think that if JimBob and Bobby Ray and Kim knew they could get away with killing gays in the name of religion they wouldn't do so then you are kidding yourself. In their eyes the Bible says gays should be stoned to death.


What people can get away in the name of God, is far different then people murdering and raping in the name of God because his Prophet did the same thing. One has actual religious justification attached while the other does not.

Furthermore, one religion is murdering gays in the name of God, while the other is not.

If all you have to offer is false equivalencies then feel free to stop responding to me.

If you aren't interested in a discussion with equivalencies then you need to exit stage left from discussions involving religion. If you're gonna play the "their scriptures say kill people card" then I'm not letting your ass off the hook on the OT. The Bibile doesn't get to start with the Gospels just because the OT doesn't fit your narrative.


The actions in OT has nothing to do with Christianity. It is the history of the Jews before the arrival of Christ.

I'm sure will find some agreement for that misplaced and mistaken view, but two mistakes doesn't make a true equivalency.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.
Top
 Profile  
 
leashyourkids
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Just to be clear, we're talking about Fox's football postgame show, right?

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby
Top
 Profile  
 
Seacrest
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:43 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38787
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
leashyourkids wrote:
Just to be clear, we're talking about Fox's football postgame show, right?


:lol: :lol:

That ESPN show thing has certainly blown up this year.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.
Top
 Profile  
 
Phil McCracken
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:08 am
Posts: 14018
Location: Underneath the Grace of Timothy Richard Tebow
pizza_Place: ------
leashyourkids wrote:
Just to be clear, we're talking about Fox's football postgame show, right?

Image

_________________
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rpb is wrong. Phil McCracken is useful.

Chus wrote:
RPB is right. You suck. :lol:
Top
 Profile  
 
KDdidit
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 11:28 am
Posts: 24725
Location: Boofoo Zoo
pizza_Place: Chuck E Cheese
Nicodemus? The rat from NIHM?
Top
 Profile  
 
Don Tiny
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:10 am
Posts: 42094
Location: Rock Ridge (splendid!)
pizza_Place: Charlie Fox's / Paisano's
Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Dignified Rube wrote:
The Law and prophecies of the OT is are the basis for Christianity, except for faith in Christ replacing adherence to the Law as a means to salvation.


I will correct my original statement. Thanks for pointing it out.

What i meant to say was the bad actions of those in the OT have nothing to do with Christianity.

So are you dismissing the entire book of Leviticus then? That's not what Little Crest's priest would say to do....

In very general terms, to have any realization of where one is and where they are going, one has to first know from whence they came.

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George
Top
 Profile  
 
formerlyknownas
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2015 6:08 pm
Posts: 3717
Location: East of Eden
pizza_Place: Vito and Nick's
Phil McCracken wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Just to be clear, we're talking about Fox's football postgame show, right?

Image

Look at all them Jews....

_________________
rogers park bryan wrote:
This registered sex offender I regularly converse with on the internet just said something really stupid
Top
 Profile  
 
Seacrest
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:54 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38787
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Dignified Rube wrote:
The Law and prophecies of the OT is are the basis for Christianity, except for faith in Christ replacing adherence to the Law as a means to salvation.


I will correct my original statement. Thanks for pointing it out.

What i meant to say was the bad actions of those in the OT have nothing to do with Christianity.

So are you dismissing the entire book of Leviticus then? That's not what Little Crest's priest would say to do....



What exactly does that have to do with falsely equating the bad actions in the OT from the Christian message in the NT?

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.
Top
 Profile  
 
Baby McNown
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:56 am 
Seacrest wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Dignified Rube wrote:
The Law and prophecies of the OT is are the basis for Christianity, except for faith in Christ replacing adherence to the Law as a means to salvation.


I will correct my original statement. Thanks for pointing it out.

What i meant to say was the bad actions of those in the OT have nothing to do with Christianity.

So are you dismissing the entire book of Leviticus then? That's not what Little Crest's priest would say to do....



What exactly does that have to do with falsely equating the bad actions in the OT from the Christian message in the NT?

If you have to ask that question then you have no business talking about religion. You're flat ignoring the entire first half of the book because it doesn't fit your argument.
Top
  
 
Dignified Rube
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 11:42 am
Posts: 4808
pizza_Place: Home Run Inn
formerlyknownas wrote:
Not even translated as "rabbi" in many new English versions. Rabbinic Judaism didn't really get started until well after the destruction of the temple (70 AD). Like several hundred years later. (I think)


You accept the many new English versions as being more authoritative than the KJV? You're erring right there.

I know the KJV is not easy to follow or understand, but it trumps all other versions.
Top
 Profile  
 
Baby McNown
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:01 pm 
Dignified Rube wrote:
formerlyknownas wrote:
Not even translated as "rabbi" in many new English versions. Rabbinic Judaism didn't really get started until well after the destruction of the temple (70 AD). Like several hundred years later. (I think)


You accept the many new English versions as being more authoritative than the KJV? You're erring right there.

I know the KJV is not easy to follow or understand, but it trumps all other versions.

The only 2 books on Kendrick's nightstand were the Marine Corps Code of Conduct and the King James Bible.
Top
  
 
Dignified Rube
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 11:42 am
Posts: 4808
pizza_Place: Home Run Inn
Seacrest wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Dignified Rube wrote:
The Law and prophecies of the OT is are the basis for Christianity, except for faith in Christ replacing adherence to the Law as a means to salvation.


I will correct my original statement. Thanks for pointing it out.

What i meant to say was the bad actions of those in the OT have nothing to do with Christianity.

So are you dismissing the entire book of Leviticus then? That's not what Little Crest's priest would say to do....



What exactly does that have to do with falsely equating the bad actions in the OT from the Christian message in the NT?


There was a lot of worshiping other Gods, including by his own people, before the NT. Do you blame God for being angry?
Top
 Profile  
 
Seacrest
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:06 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38787
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Dignified Rube wrote:
The Law and prophecies of the OT is are the basis for Christianity, except for faith in Christ replacing adherence to the Law as a means to salvation.


I will correct my original statement. Thanks for pointing it out.

What i meant to say was the bad actions of those in the OT have nothing to do with Christianity.

So are you dismissing the entire book of Leviticus then? That's not what Little Crest's priest would say to do....



What exactly does that have to do with falsely equating the bad actions in the OT from the Christian message in the NT?

If you have to ask that question then you have no business talking about religion. You're flat ignoring the entire first half of the book because it doesn't fit your argument.



I don't have an argument.

Your attempt to equate the behavior of the Jews in the OT with the central precept of Christ falls flat on its own.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.
Top
 Profile  
 
denisdman
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33244
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
Baby McNown wrote:
Darmak and Jalad at Tenagra.


Baby McNown wrote:
The only 2 books on Kendrick's nightstand were the Marine Corps Code of Conduct and the King James Bible.



Baby, you're doing work here today. Solid cultural references amid of a sea of disputes.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You
Top
 Profile  
 
Seacrest
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:08 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38787
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Dignified Rube wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Dignified Rube wrote:
The Law and prophecies of the OT is are the basis for Christianity, except for faith in Christ replacing adherence to the Law as a means to salvation.


I will correct my original statement. Thanks for pointing it out.

What i meant to say was the bad actions of those in the OT have nothing to do with Christianity.

So are you dismissing the entire book of Leviticus then? That's not what Little Crest's priest would say to do....



What exactly does that have to do with falsely equating the bad actions in the OT from the Christian message in the NT?


There was a lot of worshiping other Gods, including by his own people, before the NT. Do you blame God for being angry?


of course not.

Let's take a step back.

I stated that the a Christian can be held accountable for their behavior by the words of Christ. What followed was Bmac ascribing the actions of the Jews in the OT to Christ.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.
Top
 Profile  
 
JORR
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:11 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80568
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
Dignified Rube wrote:
There was a lot of worshiping other Gods, including by his own people, before the NT. Do you blame God for being angry?


Isn't there currently a lot of worshiping other Gods among certain groups of Christians?

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.
Top
 Profile  
 
Baby McNown
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:11 pm 
Seacrest wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Dignified Rube wrote:
The Law and prophecies of the OT is are the basis for Christianity, except for faith in Christ replacing adherence to the Law as a means to salvation.


I will correct my original statement. Thanks for pointing it out.

What i meant to say was the bad actions of those in the OT have nothing to do with Christianity.

So are you dismissing the entire book of Leviticus then? That's not what Little Crest's priest would say to do....



What exactly does that have to do with falsely equating the bad actions in the OT from the Christian message in the NT?

If you have to ask that question then you have no business talking about religion. You're flat ignoring the entire first half of the book because it doesn't fit your argument.



I don't have an argument.

Your attempt to equate the behavior of the Jews in the OT with the central precept of Christ falls flat on its own.

It does no such thing! That's the problem with trying to debate you on this stuff. You know darn well that the OT is used in mass, it is taught in Diocese schools, it is the the whole scripture behind the "religious freedom" movement, yet to you it doesn't matter because Musilms are evil. Pick a lane dude. You can't go lumping the entire Muslim belief system together without also using your whole book of scripture.

(Apologies ahead of time for a large gap in responses now. I'm not ducking the debate. Rain finally stopped so I have to replace a fuel filter on this damn boat motor and get back to fishing.)
Top
  
 
JORR
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:12 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80568
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
Baby McNown wrote:
It does no such thing! That's the problem with trying to debate you on this stuff. You know darn well that the OT is used in mass, it is taught in Diocese schools, it is the the whole scripture behind the "religious freedom" movement, yet to you it doesn't matter because Musilms are evil. Pick a lane dude. You can't go lumping the entire Muslim belief system together without also using your whole book of scripture.

(Apologies ahead of time for a large gap in responses now. I'm not ducking the debate. Rain finally stopped so I have to replace a fuel filter on this damn boat motor and get back to fishing.)



I think Don Tiny gave you the answer above, didn't he?

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.
Top
 Profile  
 
Bagels
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:10 pm
Posts: 32164
pizza_Place: Milano's
Baby McNown wrote:
Apologies ahead of time for a large gap in responses now


no need to apologize
Top
 Profile  
 
Dignified Rube
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 11:42 am
Posts: 4808
pizza_Place: Home Run Inn
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Dignified Rube wrote:
There was a lot of worshiping other Gods, including by his own people, before the NT. Do you blame God for being angry?


Isn't there currently a lot of worshiping other Gods among certain groups of Christians?


Perhaps. Then wouldn't they be false Christians?

The Catholics are wrong for their worshiping of Mary, which has no biblical basis. It was Jesus, her son, that was/is God, not she. I don't think such belief sits well with God, nor with their other "made-up" doctrine.

Since the OT, the Jews have worshiped the true God. However, through their own pride, they did not accept Jesus. So God has punished them accordingly, but they're still his people.


Last edited by Dignified Rube on Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Jbi11s
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:05 am
Posts: 28664
pizza_Place: Clamburger's
Jesus, some of you people have been to church too goddamn much. I have no idea what's going on in this thread.

_________________
Nardi wrote:
Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole
Top
 Profile  
 
Seacrest
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:30 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38787
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Baby McNown wrote:
It does no such thing! That's the problem with trying to debate you on this stuff. You know darn well that the OT is used in mass, it is taught in Diocese schools, it is the the whole scripture behind the "religious freedom" movement, yet to you it doesn't matter because Musilms are evil. Pick a lane dude. You can't go lumping the entire Muslim belief system together without also using your whole book of scripture.
(Apologies ahead of time for a large gap in responses now. I'm not ducking the debate. Rain finally stopped so I have to replace a fuel filter on this damn boat motor and get back to fishing.)


Baby McNown wrote:
If you're gonna play the "their scriptures say kill people card" then I'm not letting your ass off the hook on the OT. The Bibile doesn't get to start with the Gospels just because the OT doesn't fit your narrative.


Here is your original response.

Christianity and the Gospels do start and end with Christ. The reading of OT scripture is not done to teach behavior, it is done to teach the history of family. Where and how our ancestors got here leading up to Christ.

The problem for sake of debate comes in when you and others post what you were taught about Catholics, like it is the Gospel truth.

Christ was clear in what he taught. In word and action.

If you have a problem with the words and actions of Mohammed, I really don't know how to help you. If you want to criticize some of us here for pointing out what Muslims agree with, then that is certainly your perogative.

It's incredibly odd though to be criticized for simply saying the truth.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.
Top
 Profile  
 
leashyourkids
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Jbi11s wrote:
Jesus, some of you people have been to church too goddamn much. I have no idea what's going on in this thread.


Some prick killed some other prick and blamed it on God. The end.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby
Top
 Profile  
 
Seacrest
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:31 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38787
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Dignified Rube wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Dignified Rube wrote:
There was a lot of worshiping other Gods, including by his own people, before the NT. Do you blame God for being angry?


Isn't there currently a lot of worshiping other Gods among certain groups of Christians?


Perhaps. Then wouldn't they be false Christians?

The Catholics are wrong for their worshiping of Mary, which has no biblical basis. It was Jesus, her son, that was/is God, not she. I don't think such belief sits well with God, nor with their other "made-up" doctrine.

Since the OT, the Jews have worshiped the true God. However, through their own pride, they did not accept Jesus. So God has punished them accordingly, but they're still his people.


:lol: :lol:

My Lutheran wife was taught the same thing.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 13 of 20
  [ 571 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 20  Next

Board index » GENERAL BULLSHIT SECTION » GENERAL DISCUSSION

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 31 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group