Why Should Jesus Love Me?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#547544 Jun 17, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
For 800 years, the unbaptised have been told that they were going to somewhere called limbo, like the phantom zone a' la General Zod.
for 800 years the parents of every unbaptised child who subscribed to catholicism believed the soul of their child was trapped there for eternity...and suddenly in 2008...Limbo go *poof*. Where did the kids go who had been trapped there for 8 centuries? Were they even there? Did Limbo exist? OR WAS IT SOMETHING TO SCARE PARENTS TO THE BAPTISMAL FONT AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY?
AS WE ALL KNOW THE CATHOLICS LIKE TO GET 'EM YOUNG!
So ask yourself, what else about the entire catholic doctrine is COMPLETELY MADE UP ON THE SPOT AND CAN JUST BE FORGOTTEN?
Children of roman catholic parents have no choice in the matter dummy.
So...

Once again your posts shows that children are not told they are going to hell

Thanks a third time dummy

LOL

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#547545 Jun 17, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
No it has been based on THEIR words
-Happy Lesbo: claims to be a lesbian fighting for equality but says there is nothing wrong with a statement like "filthy gay liar" and compared using gay in a string of insults with using a group as a compliment like "good Christian man".
She claimed she would apologize if others said she defends Ians then disappeared when it happened
She gave 7 stories for why she couldn't source a quote where she obviously lied about getting it off the Internet and constantly cries bullying while she continues with insults of her own. But when she does it she calls them "observations"
-Catcher: A Lawyer who thinks it doesn't matter if you use the proper legal terms in court, made claims he could get testimony stricken he can't, and gave terrible advice as to Miranda
-Ians - A doctor that didn't know Ritalin had the adverse effect on adults, wrote thousands of prescriptions of pain medication and thinks opiates aren't physically addictive, and has been caught lying several times
To be paranoid I would have to have something to be paranoid about. Do you think it makes one lick of difference to me whether he uses a proxy or what any of you clowns say?
I never said i was worried about you living by me. You are paranoid to think I am worried about that!
You are a buffoon.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#547546 Jun 17, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text>And if [your] assumption to that is no or you don't have to worship Jesus Christ to please that 'cosmic mega being' as you say...then you do so at [your]own risk, not mine.
It's no assumption.

It's exactly what the bible says.

If the god of the bible didn't want people to be judged by their works then he would have removed that particular scripture.

"I saw the dead, both great and small, standing before God's throne. And the books were opened, including the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to what they had done, as recorded in the books."

Rev 20:12

"The sea gave up its dead, and death and the grave gave up their dead. And all were judged according to their deeds."

Rev 20:13

There you have it.

Your own holy book says we will be judged by our works/deeds. Nothing there about being judged by our faith.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#547547 Jun 17, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text>He sure healed a lot of disabled people though.
He still doesn't one disabled people coming near him.

What would you think of a high-ranking government official who said that all disabled people were barred from approaching him?

You'd think he was crazy.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#547548 Jun 17, 2013
"want" not "one"

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#547549 Jun 17, 2013
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a buffoon.
LOL

The last vestige of the the man who can't debate on merit!

I include insults simply because they are funny and do so in the middle of systematically using facts to prove my point or disprove the point of someone else

When you and many in your group are left scratching your rear-end trying to figure out how you can lie your way out of the newest hole you dug for yourself, this is what you normally end up having to resort to as you sure can't argue based on the facts!

Thank you for making it so obvious what I said in my post was true.

:)

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#547550 Jun 17, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
Newsflash!! Death is a part of life. And children die as well. Does the gunman share any blame? what about his mother that kept guns in the house knowing her son had a mental disease, does she get any blame?
They most definitely do get blamed.

Yet you honestly believe your god acts to help you but refused to act to help save the lives of those kids.

What makes you so special?
trifecta1 wrote:
what about his mother that kept guns in the house knowing her son had a mental disease, does she get any blame?
What's the difference between this and your god keeping the serpent in the Garden of Eden when he knew how evil and manipulative the serpent was? Does he get the blame?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#547551 Jun 17, 2013
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
Doctors heal far more.
They certainly do.

With much help from the medical scientists who have all-but-eradicated diseases like smallpox and polio which Christians believe the bible god created.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#547552 Jun 17, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text>??? What's your point?
The point is that they do far more to help than your invisible sky pixie ever does.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#547553 Jun 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That depends. Is he doing her or is she doing him?
LMAO!
lol
Mark

Hedel, Netherlands

#547554 Jun 17, 2013
wilderide wrote:
No, I'm saying that homosexual sex and homosexuality are two different things, and not always related to each other. Two teenage kids of the same gender can have sex experimentally with each other, but that doesn't make either of them homosexual. People in prison who have sex with each other for lack of an alternative (or as a demonstration of dominance) aren't romantically attached to each other.
Here you do it again. You use a definition that leads to a conclusion.

You also mix things in like romance. But behavioural science must look at behaviour itself, without starting with these precognitions.

People can be romantically involved with plastic dolls nowadays in long term relationships. Are you going tell me this is predetermined preference? And Christians speaks of Jesus as their bridegroom and their love relation with this fantasized book figure. Is this innate behaviour?

It only tells us how flexible human nature is. Homosexuals want to believe that homosexuality is innate to defend themselves against Christianity. Like Christianity wants to believe it is free choice to justify their discrimination. Both construct these ideas to sustain their position.

In reality preferences can be innate but we can also develop them. I hate olives at first (clearly not innate), but i learned to love them. In my next life I may have an innate preference to olives.

I do not care one way or the other, i worship Nature. I deeply revere diversity. I love the diversity nature brings. I think there is immense beauty in diversity. That is why i worship many Gods and revere all beings and none have to justify their nature. Even if behaviour is hurtful to others, we should confine ourself to only limiting the behaviour. Some people are like aggressive, it is their nature, give them a place where they can express their nature in non-harmful way. Let them fight in sports or make them a doorman. They feel happy and they no longer have to beat their wives.
wilderide wrote:
But then heterosexuality would be likewise defined as merely sexual activity. That is only looking at a small part of human relationship.s
Yes indeed. Christianity has succeeded in convincing us that the behaviour it subscribes is natural as it is normal.

But is it natural for human males to have long term sexual and monogamous relationships with women? In Africa is never was, and black people all over the world still have trouble to adapting to this European ideal.
wilderide wrote:
Mmmmmm. No. First, obviously, this doesn't describe lesbianism very well.
Indeed, Lesbianism is a very different thing and should not be treated as the same thing. Women are a totally different creature. Our society with its unisex ideal, which comes from suppressing sex, is denying that.
wilderide wrote:
Secondly, I think many gay people feel more free to play with or reject the predominantly heterosexual gender role stereotypes. Dominance can certainly be an aspect of that, but I think it's a mistake to overemphasize how much of an influence that has.
We under-emphasize it you mean. The funny thing is that homosexuality was deeply intertwined with machismo, but since we started to oppress the homosexual and he became a victim, he is portrayed like an weak over-feminine man. But as you so rightly state down here:

<quoted text>
wilderide wrote:
I know what you are saying, but I find this whole concept odd. Frankly, there is very little femininity when sex is between two men.
Exactly!
Doctor REALITY

United States

#547555 Jun 17, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
They certainly do.
With much help from the medical scientists who have all-but-eradicated diseases like smallpox and polio which Christians believe the bible god created.
You are a LAIR, and you are of your father, the devil.
Doctor REALITY

United States

#547556 Jun 17, 2013
liar...
Mark

Hedel, Netherlands

#547557 Jun 17, 2013
wilderide wrote:
I think we necessarily anthropomorphize animals, and that is necessarily going to make us misunderstand them. It's a pity we cannot communicate with them more directly.
That is western thinking, based on the Bible. In the Bible only man is the image of God. Animals are made for humans. How could they have intelligence, feelings, emotions? In the Talmud we even see the idea expressed that the gentiles are simply animals in human form to be able to better serve the Jews (Reminds very much of the Anunaki Gods of Sumeria)

In Nature religion animals are not given this low place. Many are even considered messengers to the Gods. That is why Egyptian Gods have animal heads. It makes them higher beings rather than lower beings.

Animals are more feeling than rationalizing human beings, does that make them inferior? Yes it does from the viewpoint of the rationalizing man. Our culture rather despises feeling as polluter of rational thinking.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#547558 Jun 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
O_o
"I will enslave you to your enemies
in[a] a land you do not know,
for my anger will kindle a fire
that will burn against you.”
Where does that say anything about selling back into slavery?
Ok, I'm not going to claim that I know the bible better than you do.

However, that scripture is all about what the bible god will do if people don't toe the line and worship him.

In other words he will make sure his people are enslaved again.

My point about free will still stands, though

_-Alice-_

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#547559 Jun 17, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text>You can pontificate, defecate, twist, flounder, jump through hoops or write until you fingers turn purple---you still part of a religion:
"...Among the religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism(Atheism), and others..."
Torcaso v. Watkins (1961)
That statement is part of the case, period. Secular Humanism which includes (Atheism) is part of the writings by a Supreme Court Judge involved in the case. It is part of the case.
As such, you're part of the most asinine and azz clown religions ever invented by mankind. Congratulations. Now go find Dawkins and tell him to freethink you a clue.
I'm an atheist but I'm not a secular humanist. Why are you lying?

“I.Spirit.Son.God”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#547560 Jun 17, 2013
??? Is this kind of thinking the product of your Atheistic teachings?? You definitely need to reach out to Dawkins for help Brackets can be used within another person's writings to clarify.
http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/parenthe...

My use of the () was to clarify Secular Humanism can mean Atheism as well...iyai!, I thought atheists were smart? where the set of you come from on this billboard I not know? oy!
[QUOTE who="scaritual"]< quoted text> You're still providing that fabricated portion of the statement you added in, even after it was pointed out you disingenuously and deceptively, did that.
Fascinating.
<quoted text>You should understand at this point what that footnoted observation by Justice Black meant, and that it didn't mean what you think it meant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obiter_dictum
<quoted text> Secular Humanists can be atheists, or agnostics, or hold various viewpoints, but they don't have to be atheists or agnostics to be Secular Humanists.
That's much like saying a Christian must believe in the triune, or that being a Christian means you go to church on Sunday.
Have you ever heard of Christian atheists? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheis...
http://christianatheist.com/ <= That might be of interest to some Christians reading along.
<quoted text>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obiter_dictum
You should probably look at this, too. Peloza v. Capistrano School District, from 1994: "We reject this claim because neither the Supreme Court, nor this circuit, has ever held that evolutionism or secular humanism are `religions' for Establishment Clause purposes."
In that above referenced case -(Peloza v. Capistrano School)- the Supreme Court refused to reverse a ruling that secular humanism is not a religion.
<quoted text> It's good to see you admit religions are invented by man.
<quoted text> No, you deserve the congratulations. Your admission speaks volumes.
<quoted text>
Why would I do that?
I don't let people think for me, or an organization or religion declare what I think.
That's what many theists do, however.
A religion not have anything to with whether you let people think for you or not. Atheism/Secular Humanism is a religion defined by the United States Supreme Court.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#547561 Jun 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Goalpost change!
QUICK!
Lol

You may see it as that - it's not.

We're agreed that Christianity says mankind is inherently sinful.

I'm pretty sure we're also agreed that words like good, kind, considerate, loving, etc are not used by Christians when describing sin.

More often than not, they'll use words like: evil, wretched, damned, flawed, abominable, vile, etc.

Therefore, if mankind is inherently sinful then the less favourable words are what believers will use.

Are you trying to say that Christians will use nice words when describing the sins of mankind?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#547562 Jun 17, 2013
Mark wrote:
<quoted text>

But is it natural for human males to have long term sexual and monogamous relationships with women? In Africa is never was, and black people all over the world still have trouble to adapting to this European ideal.
Um....hmmmm.

Trying not to jump the gun here.

You can't possibly be suggesting that it is just black men who seem to have difficulty with monogamy can you?

Or that European men don't?

And please keep in mind divorce and marriage rates don't factor in undisclosed infidelity.

One could argue African Americans are more honest in that regard as they won't put up the front to satisfy some expected social obligation of marriage and monogamy.

Not that it necessarily means there are not unethical things that can also take place. Such as not supporting a child or things like that

But if you are saying what it appears like you are saying, what are the reasons you feel the struggle with monogamy is something more inherent to the black community and not men in general?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#547563 Jun 17, 2013
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
Your posts constantly prove that you worship Satan.
All you are is a hate filled liar.
Yes, that's about the size of it.

Like that German guy who had the meltdown, Trifecta's religion is defined by hatred.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min confrinting with ... 670,527
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 9 min Brandy trujillo 980,315
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 10 min Shiralee 445,671
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 14 min Sky Writer 31 184,305
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 1 hr Farting Hillary 101,143
what are the physical differences between india... (Jun '09) 3 hr Blackwomenrule 89
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 4 hr David C Pumpkins 286,468
More from around the web