If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Patheos)   Progressive Christian (yes, they exist) lays out case for Evangelical Republicans being guilty of Onanism, and no he isn't talking about when they think of Saint Sarah at night   (patheos.com) divider line 318
    More: Obvious, progressive Christians, Republican, sister-in-law  
•       •       •

3347 clicks; posted to Politics » on 19 Aug 2013 at 2:25 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



318 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-19 02:52:59 PM

Infernalist: Obama's Reptiloid Master: hubiestubert: You mean the Bible actually condones all this sort of welfare? What were these folks, dirty Commies?

Well...

Nomadic herder and agricultural communities did have a flexible system of property ownership and many mutual obligations of support, owing to a more community-organized model. It was only later adoption of specialized labor and the creation of intertribal trade markets that allowed the rise of an owner class...

Oh. You were being facetious. I apologize. Your people's ways are yet strange to me.

I maintain that if Jesus were to take up his mission in today's world, he'd be a crunch-head hippie commie.

1) He clothed the poor.

2) He fed the poor.

3) He condemned the rich.

4) He had authority issues with the established Church.

5) He hung out with a buncha dudes.

6) He slept at the strangest times.  Seriously, taking a nap while your boat is in danger of sinking?  Dude was sleepy, for real.

7) He basically told the world to be good to each other.

8) Nonviolent protester.

9) Quit his dayjob to join a wandering commune.


10) Handed out free health-care.  Even for the really expensive, really terminal cases.
 
2013-08-19 02:53:29 PM
I read that as "Onionism" and thought it meant that Evangelical Republicans don't know the difference between reality and satire.
 
2013-08-19 02:54:10 PM

walkingtall: Wow there is so much wrong with that article I don't even know where to begin. I knew fark would be all over this as soon as I saw it.


I'm not a Christian, so please tell me what is wrong with the article.  It seems to make more sense to me than "onanism is masturbation" I've always heard, but I've never read nor studied the bible.
 
2013-08-19 02:54:45 PM

enry: Disposable Rob: Progressive Christian(yes they exist)

They? Before I even hovered over the link, I figured it would be Fred Clark (okay, the Patheos link was a big clue). Clark is literally the only person I've read on the Internet who claims to be both a progressive and an Evangelical Christian. "They" may exist, but in the same way that Bigfoot may exist.

I'm not evangelical, but progressive Christians do exist.

/Episcopal, recovering Catholic
//Lutherans (at least ELCA) are generally more liberal too


Yeah, I suppose that if you have to specify someone is a progressive Christian, you are likely talking about someone who is Evangelical, Southern Baptist, or a similar stripe.
 
2013-08-19 02:57:05 PM

GameSprocket: I read that as "Onionism" and thought it meant that Evangelical Republicans don't know the difference between reality and satire.


Fits
 
2013-08-19 02:57:35 PM

Disposable Rob: enry: Disposable Rob: Progressive Christian(yes they exist)

They? Before I even hovered over the link, I figured it would be Fred Clark (okay, the Patheos link was a big clue). Clark is literally the only person I've read on the Internet who claims to be both a progressive and an Evangelical Christian. "They" may exist, but in the same way that Bigfoot may exist.

I'm not evangelical, but progressive Christians do exist.

/Episcopal, recovering Catholic
//Lutherans (at least ELCA) are generally more liberal too

Yeah, I suppose that if you have to specify someone is a progressive Christian, you are likely talking about someone who is Evangelical, Southern Baptist, or a similar stripe.


Well when you say "Christian" it's usually code for Evangelical so I can see the confusion.  Stupid Republicans hijacked that word too.

/liberal Baptist, that's funny.
 
2013-08-19 02:57:39 PM

Weaver95: Princess Ryans Knickers: Bloody William: But Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord put him to death.

Then Judah said to Onan, "Go in to your brother's wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her; raise up offspring for your brother." But since Onan knew that the offspring would not be his, he spilled his semen on the ground whenever he went in to his brother's wife, so that he would not give offspring to his brother.

What he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.
This seems less a condemnation of masturbating, and more a condemnation of pulling out.

Try reading the story in context. It's clear that it's not about masturbating. It's about not fulfilling his duty to give her a child.

And exploiting the situation and misfortune of others for personal pleasure and gain.


Bingo!
 
2013-08-19 02:58:20 PM

walkingtall: Wow there is so much wrong with that article I don't even know where to begin. I knew fark would be all over this as soon as I saw it.


Please proceed, governor....
 
2013-08-19 02:58:22 PM
As a scholar of ancient Israel, I find the author to be spot-on.  Nice find, subby.
 
2013-08-19 02:59:41 PM

Karac: Infernalist: Obama's Reptiloid Master: hubiestubert: You mean the Bible actually condones all this sort of welfare? What were these folks, dirty Commies?

Well...

Nomadic herder and agricultural communities did have a flexible system of property ownership and many mutual obligations of support, owing to a more community-organized model. It was only later adoption of specialized labor and the creation of intertribal trade markets that allowed the rise of an owner class...

Oh. You were being facetious. I apologize. Your people's ways are yet strange to me.

I maintain that if Jesus were to take up his mission in today's world, he'd be a crunch-head hippie commie.

1) He clothed the poor.

2) He fed the poor.

3) He condemned the rich.

4) He had authority issues with the established Church.

5) He hung out with a buncha dudes.

6) He slept at the strangest times.  Seriously, taking a nap while your boat is in danger of sinking?  Dude was sleepy, for real.

7) He basically told the world to be good to each other.

8) Nonviolent protester.

9) Quit his dayjob to join a wandering commune.

10) Handed out free health-care.  Even for the really expensive, really terminal cases.


11) Turned water into party time.
 
2013-08-19 02:59:43 PM

Infernalist: 7) He basically told the world to be good to each other.

10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. 10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.



http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/mt/10.html#34

8) Nonviolent protester.


2:14 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting:2:15 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;
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/jn/2.html#11
 
2013-08-19 03:00:32 PM

Obama's Reptiloid Master: You kidding me? That's not even a controversial interpretation of the Onan story. Like, everyone but southern big tent revival preachers who got their degrees at Hollerin' Bob's School a'Divinity and Faith Healin' agrees with that interpretation because it's so painstakingly straightforward.


I mean using this as a tool to condemn Christians as a whole. People have always used the Bible as a tool to oppress and further their own agenda. Christian do it just as badly as anyone else. People in this thread claim to know more about the Bible then Christians and that may be true. The Devil knows the Bible better than any biblical scholar that has lived or will ever live. He still misses the point though. And that is where people like Weaver95 go wrong. Also the author of the article, badly
 
2013-08-19 03:01:41 PM

Karac: 10) Handed out free health-care. Even for the really expensive, really terminal cases.


Don't forget about the already terminal cases too
 
2013-08-19 03:02:47 PM
The thing that always bothered me about the story of Onan is there is really no way to tell how hot the sister-in-law was.
 
2013-08-19 03:04:04 PM

walkingtall: Obama's Reptiloid Master: You kidding me? That's not even a controversial interpretation of the Onan story. Like, everyone but southern big tent revival preachers who got their degrees at Hollerin' Bob's School a'Divinity and Faith Healin' agrees with that interpretation because it's so painstakingly straightforward.

I mean using this as a tool to condemn Christians as a whole. People have always used the Bible as a tool to oppress and further their own agenda. Christian do it just as badly as anyone else. People in this thread claim to know more about the Bible then Christians and that may be true. The Devil knows the Bible better than any biblical scholar that has lived or will ever live. He still misses the point though. And that is where people like Weaver95 go wrong. Also the author of the article, badly


But isn't the author a self professed Christian?  I thought the point of the article wasn't to condemn Christians, but to condemn people who will actively attack safety nets.
 
2013-08-19 03:04:58 PM

Colour_out_of_Space: The thing that always bothered me about the story of Onan is there is really no way to tell how hot the sister-in-law was.


Hot enough to have sex with, not so hot as to be unable to pull out despite threat of smiting.
 
2013-08-19 03:06:11 PM

Colour_out_of_Space: The thing that always bothered me about the story of Onan is there is really no way to tell how hot the sister-in-law was.


If you read "the rest of the story," she disguises herself as a hooker and bangs her father-in-law. So maybe pretty hot?
 
2013-08-19 03:06:32 PM

walkingtall: Obama's Reptiloid Master: You kidding me? That's not even a controversial interpretation of the Onan story. Like, everyone but southern big tent revival preachers who got their degrees at Hollerin' Bob's School a'Divinity and Faith Healin' agrees with that interpretation because it's so painstakingly straightforward.

I mean using this as a tool to condemn Christians as a whole. People have always used the Bible as a tool to oppress and further their own agenda. Christian do it just as badly as anyone else. People in this thread claim to know more about the Bible then Christians and that may be true. The Devil knows the Bible better than any biblical scholar that has lived or will ever live. He still misses the point though. And that is where people like Weaver95 go wrong. Also the author of the article, badly


"Attacking christians as a whole" translated from walkingtall-speak==attacking the beliefs of willfully ignorant Christians who are actually republicans.
 
2013-08-19 03:06:39 PM

gnosis301: Kinda like how people think Sodom was destroyed because of teh ghey even though the reasons are explicitly and implicitly spelled out multiple times in the Bible as not having anything to do with said ghey?


{sam jackson}
Ezekiel 16: 49
"'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.
{/Sam Jackson}

That's because if they thought too hard about thge REAL sin of Sodom, or indeed the reason God almost invariably gives in the OT for smiting a place, or allowing someone to destroy Israel,  or indeed the way path to heaven/hell that Jesus explicitly spelled out in the parable of the sheeps and goats,  they couldn;t be republicans anymore
 
2013-08-19 03:07:21 PM

walkingtall: Problems with this article:
*walkingtall is too stupid to overcome what he's been told is true.

I have known what the true point of the story is even before I became a Christian. I have never stepped foot in a church nor talked to another Christian that interprets this in any way different then the author does. He died for violating the spirit of the law. That is what Jesus fought the Pharisees about so vehemently. They got the laws right technically and missed the entire point and spirit of the law. The author uses this like this is some kind of profound knowledge only known to world outside of Christendom. That is where the article fails so badly.


He fails so badly for interpreting this in a way that everyone else does?

/DOES NOT COMPUTE
 
2013-08-19 03:08:34 PM

Colour_out_of_Space: The thing that always bothered me about the story of Onan is there is really no way to tell how hot the sister-in-law was.


If you read on, she was hot enough for her father-in-law to pay to have sex with her.
 
2013-08-19 03:10:19 PM

walkingtall: Problems with this article:
*walkingtall is too stupid to overcome what he's been told is true.

I have known what the true point of the story is even before I became a Christian. I have never stepped foot in a church nor talked to another Christian that interprets this in any way different then the author does. He died for violating the spirit of the law. That is what Jesus fought the Pharisees about so vehemently. They got the laws right technically and missed the entire point and spirit of the law. The author uses this like this is some kind of profound knowledge only known to world outside of Christendom. That is where the article fails so badly.


My favorite parts of the bible are the ones where Jesus tells everybody how wrong they are, but never gets around to telling them why or what's right.
 
2013-08-19 03:10:38 PM
I just did some reading up on Fred Clark and this whole progressive Christianity whatever is. Interesting stuff. Obviously I don't agree with a lot of their beliefs nor do I think there is solid biblical foundations for a lot of what they claim but I hadn't heard of this before so at least I got that going for me...sigh.
 
2013-08-19 03:10:48 PM
I guess making Mammon their one true god gets a pass
 
2013-08-19 03:12:02 PM

walkingtall: Problems with this article:
*walkingtall is too stupid to overcome what he's been told is true.

I have known what the true point of the story is even before I became a Christian. I have never stepped foot in a church nor talked to another Christian that interprets this in any way different then the author does. He died for violating the spirit of the law. That is what Jesus fought the Pharisees about so vehemently. They got the laws right technically and missed the entire point and spirit of the law. The author uses this like this is some kind of profound knowledge only known to world outside of Christendom. That is where the article fails so badly.


So the author is right?  And the only problem you have is with his tone, which implies that many people don't understand what he says?

Well I can't speak for the majority but I'll say I always thought Onan was a story about masturbating.  Until today that is.
 
2013-08-19 03:13:07 PM

Weaver95: Princess Ryans Knickers: Bloody William: But Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord put him to death.

Then Judah said to Onan, "Go in to your brother's wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her; raise up offspring for your brother." But since Onan knew that the offspring would not be his, he spilled his semen on the ground whenever he went in to his brother's wife, so that he would not give offspring to his brother.

What he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.
This seems less a condemnation of masturbating, and more a condemnation of pulling out.

Try reading the story in context. It's clear that it's not about masturbating. It's about not fulfilling his duty to give her a child.

And exploiting the situation and misfortune of others for personal pleasure and gain.


the last being the key to the whole thing.  Not only did he not want the bother of raising another child but if his brother had no male heir then by levitcal law all his property, livestock, etc became Er's eventually leaving the widow with bupkiss, so part of this is also Er's attempt to take what does not belong to him
 
2013-08-19 03:14:08 PM

Aarontology: I don't want them using the Bible to tell me how to live my life any more than I want some conservative evangelical whackjob using the Bible to tell me how to live my life.


Yeah who wants people to treat others as they would wish to be treated and to remember that maybe someday you will be a hungry stranger.
 
2013-08-19 03:14:24 PM

Uranus Is Huge!: My favorite parts of the bible are the ones where Jesus tells everybody how wrong they are, but never gets around to telling them why or what's right.


Because they would not listen. He told His disciples what to do, He used parables to teach, He taught by example. He used what would translate across all the ages. If you had a group of people that wanted you dead and would not listen to anything you had to say but asked you direct questions you could only hope to do as well as Jesus did. He answered them honestly and 100% truthfully but did not elaborate because He knew it was useless.
 
2013-08-19 03:14:47 PM

Uranus Is Huge!: walkingtall: Problems with this article:
*walkingtall is too stupid to overcome what he's been told is true.

I have known what the true point of the story is even before I became a Christian. I have never stepped foot in a church nor talked to another Christian that interprets this in any way different then the author does. He died for violating the spirit of the law. That is what Jesus fought the Pharisees about so vehemently. They got the laws right technically and missed the entire point and spirit of the law. The author uses this like this is some kind of profound knowledge only known to world outside of Christendom. That is where the article fails so badly.

My favorite parts of the bible are the ones where Jesus tells everybody how wrong they are, but never gets around to telling them why or what's right.


Should have made this a long time ago:

i.imgur.com
 
2013-08-19 03:15:13 PM

Magorn: Weaver95: Princess Ryans Knickers: Bloody William: But Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and the Lord put him to death.

Then Judah said to Onan, "Go in to your brother's wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her; raise up offspring for your brother." But since Onan knew that the offspring would not be his, he spilled his semen on the ground whenever he went in to his brother's wife, so that he would not give offspring to his brother.

What he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.
This seems less a condemnation of masturbating, and more a condemnation of pulling out.

Try reading the story in context. It's clear that it's not about masturbating. It's about not fulfilling his duty to give her a child.

And exploiting the situation and misfortune of others for personal pleasure and gain.

the last being the key to the whole thing.  Not only did he not want the bother of raising another child but if his brother had no male heir then by levitcal law all his property, livestock, etc became Er's eventually leaving the widow with bupkiss, so part of this is also Er's attempt to take what does not belong to him


Understanding the social system of the era helps you to understand the true 'evil' of what Onan is doing and why God felt compelled to end him as he did.
 
2013-08-19 03:16:15 PM

walkingtall: I just did some reading up on Fred Clark and this whole progressive Christianity whatever is. Interesting stuff. Obviously I don't agree with a lot of their beliefs nor do I think there is solid biblical foundations for a lot of what they claim but I hadn't heard of this before so at least I got that going for me...sigh.


I think the point is that he doesn't think there's a biblical backing for conservative evangelicals' violating the spirit of the (biblical) law and thrusting more suffering upon the poor.
 
2013-08-19 03:18:58 PM

Esc7: Well I can't speak for the majority but I'll say I always thought Onan was a story about masturbating. Until today that is.


And this is why Christianity is failing. Christians don't even know what they claim to believe. Christians know very little history and precious little Bible. Today I will have someone in some forum tell me how Christian they are except for the whole Jesus was God thing. Well, believe that if you want but kind of hard to say you are a Christian if you do. etc

You sit there all smug like this author has hit the nail on the head but the real problem is that people do not even know what they are supposed to believe nor do any due diligence.
 
2013-08-19 03:19:25 PM

hubiestubert: You mean the Bible actually condones all this sort of welfare? What were these folks, dirty Commies?


um, yes.

Acts 4:32-35

32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God's grace was so powerfully at work in them all 34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.
 
2013-08-19 03:22:35 PM

walkingtall: I just did some reading up on Fred Clark and this whole progressive Christianity whatever is. Interesting stuff. Obviously I don't agree with a lot of their beliefs nor do I think there is solid biblical foundations for a lot of what they claim but I hadn't heard of this before so at least I got that going for me...sigh.


What do you think of conservative republican attempts to combine ayn rands objectivism with evangelical Christianity? I'm curious to know your opinion.
 
2013-08-19 03:23:25 PM

Petey4335: hubiestubert: You mean the Bible actually condones all this sort of welfare? What were these folks, dirty Commies?

um, yes.

Acts 4:32-35

32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God's grace was so powerfully at work in them all 34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.


and, lest people be unconvinced by that:

 'When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will put the sheep at his right hand and the goats at the left.

Then the king will say to those at his right hand, "Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me." Then the righteous will answer him, "Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?" And the king will answer them, "Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me."

Then he will say to those at his left hand, "You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me." Then they also will answer, "Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?" Then he will answer them, "Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me."

And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.'
   Matthew 25: 31-46
 
2013-08-19 03:25:17 PM

astro716: I think the point is that he doesn't think there's a biblical backing for conservative evangelicals' violating the spirit of the (biblical) law and thrusting more suffering upon the poor.


Has it really got to the point where we have two sides so demonizing the other that this statement is ok in any discussion? You should be ashamed of yourself. Useless emotion filled accusations do not a debate make. There is not a single conservative evangelical that you can show me wishes, desires, or through inaction, is ok with suffering upon the poor. They might not agree with the path and methods to help but to make a claim like this and projecting evil motives on an entire group of people is simply ridiculous. Fark is always up in arms about how bad Christians are yet claims and rhetoric like this is never challenged. Shameful
 
2013-08-19 03:25:18 PM

walkingtall: Uranus Is Huge!: My favorite parts of the bible are the ones where Jesus tells everybody how wrong they are, but never gets around to telling them why or what's right.

Because they would not listen. He told His disciples what to do, He used parables to teach, He taught by example. He used what would translate across all the ages. If you had a group of people that wanted you dead and would not listen to anything you had to say but asked you direct questions you could only hope to do as well as Jesus did. He answered them honestly and 100% truthfully but did not elaborate because He knew it was useless.


For me your posts show up in a color reserved for the Troll Hall of Fame, but I will go ahead and point and laugh at both your literal-mindedness, and your grasp of the Bible.

Hint: Jesus' message is pretty clear. Modern Christians reject most of it in favor of an obsession with a handful of Paul's teachings.
 
2013-08-19 03:26:34 PM

Uranus Is Huge!: For me your posts show up in a color reserved for the Troll Hall of Fame, but I will go ahead and point and laugh at both your literal-mindedness, and your grasp of the Bible.


Please feel free to point out how my grasp of the Bible is so bad. I would very much like to hear this.
 
2013-08-19 03:26:36 PM

walkingtall: astro716: I think the point is that he doesn't think there's a biblical backing for conservative evangelicals' violating the spirit of the (biblical) law and thrusting more suffering upon the poor.

Has it really got to the point where we have two sides so demonizing the other that this statement is ok in any discussion? You should be ashamed of yourself. Useless emotion filled accusations do not a debate make. There is not a single conservative evangelical that you can show me wishes, desires, or through inaction, is ok with suffering upon the poor. They might not agree with the path and methods to help but to make a claim like this and projecting evil motives on an entire group of people is simply ridiculous. Fark is always up in arms about how bad Christians are yet claims and rhetoric like this is never challenged. Shameful


Well now that was very carefully phrased indeed....
 
2013-08-19 03:27:31 PM
1. Slacktivist is awesome. Second the recommendation to read this painstaking decapitation of Left Behind.
2. It amazes me that people misread the story of Onan so badly. Even if many understand what it actually says, another person publishing it is always a good thing. Masturbation ain't the problem.
3. That said, it'd be amusing to think of Onan saying "But God, you smote that asshole brother of mine. I don't want his name to live on anymore than you do. So this is just and good that I not give his wife the goods."
 
2013-08-19 03:27:38 PM

walkingtall: Uranus Is Huge!: For me your posts show up in a color reserved for the Troll Hall of Fame, but I will go ahead and point and laugh at both your literal-mindedness, and your grasp of the Bible.

Please feel free to point out how my grasp of the Bible is so bad. I would very much like to hear this.


Are you familiar with prosperity gospel theology at all?
 
2013-08-19 03:27:48 PM

walkingtall: astro716: I think the point is that he doesn't think there's a biblical backing for conservative evangelicals' violating the spirit of the (biblical) law and thrusting more suffering upon the poor.

Has it really got to the point where we have two sides so demonizing the other that this statement is ok in any discussion? You should be ashamed of yourself. Useless emotion filled accusations do not a debate make. There is not a single conservative evangelical that you can show me wishes, desires, or through inaction, is ok with suffering upon the poor. They might not agree with the path and methods to help but to make a claim like this and projecting evil motives on an entire group of people is simply ridiculous. Fark is always up in arms about how bad Christians are yet claims and rhetoric like this is never challenged. Shameful


Show me the evangelical action group calling their congressmen to reinstate funds from the SNAP cuts, and then we'll talk about my shame.
 
2013-08-19 03:28:20 PM

walkingtall: Uranus Is Huge!: For me your posts show up in a color reserved for the Troll Hall of Fame, but I will go ahead and point and laugh at both your literal-mindedness, and your grasp of the Bible.

Please feel free to point out how my grasp of the Bible is so bad. I would very much like to hear this.


I'd be happy to.

Which parts trouble you the most? Which parts are you struggling with?
 
2013-08-19 03:30:02 PM

walkingtall: Obama's Reptiloid Master: You kidding me? That's not even a controversial interpretation of the Onan story. Like, everyone but southern big tent revival preachers who got their degrees at Hollerin' Bob's School a'Divinity and Faith Healin' agrees with that interpretation because it's so painstakingly straightforward.

I mean using this as a tool to condemn Christians as a whole. People have always used the Bible as a tool to oppress and further their own agenda. Christian do it just as badly as anyone else. People in this thread claim to know more about the Bible then Christians and that may be true. The Devil knows the Bible better than any biblical scholar that has lived or will ever live. He still misses the point though. And that is where people like Weaver95 go wrong. Also the author of the article, badly


The Author is not condemning Christians as a whole, he is condemning those that not only do not help their fellow man but those who gain from the suffering of others.
 
2013-08-19 03:30:46 PM

Kristoph57: Someone should compile a list of lessons taught in the bible that are completely lost on modern evangelical movements.


You are too late, its already been compiled.  Here is what it looks like:

www.ejesusbracelets.com
 
2013-08-19 03:30:58 PM
any Christian that clings to any part of the Prosperity Gospel is an adherent of Mammon, not God.
 
2013-08-19 03:31:23 PM
Which parts trouble you the most? Which parts are you struggling with?

I never claimed I needed your help. You put forward that my understanding of Biblical principles is cause for derision. I am simply asking which of my beliefs about the Bible are worthy of your derision.
 
2013-08-19 03:32:42 PM

walkingtall: Which parts trouble you the most? Which parts are you struggling with?

I never claimed I needed your help. You put forward that my understanding of Biblical principles is cause for derision. I am simply asking which of my beliefs about the Bible are worthy of your derision.


Do you really want to re-read every post you've ever made about the bible?
 
2013-08-19 03:33:15 PM
1) Treat others as you would like to be treated.
2) Be kind to the less fortunate.
3) This existence is temporary and less important than what lies ahead.
4) Be grateful for the good things.

Somehow this got twisted into Prop 8 and all sorts of other weirdness.
 
2013-08-19 03:33:44 PM

walkingtall: Which parts trouble you the most? Which parts are you struggling with?

I never claimed I needed your help. You put forward that my understanding of Biblical principles is cause for derision. I am simply asking which of my beliefs about the Bible are worthy of your derision.


Well you could start by answering my question about prosperity gospel theology....
 
Displayed 50 of 318 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report