U got senti over an avatar :lol
Well, considering that's my image - it's a little strange to see someone else use it.
I mean - it's the Internet - more power to you, the more fodder for PRISM, the better, in my opinion - but I just wasn't sure what you were hoping to accomplish, there.
Apparently context is a foreign concept to you. I'm not happy that he cheated on his wife, and I don't find that act in itself comedic either. What I find funny and ironic is that, is that on he cheated on the wife who defended with some form of God involved, which is, ironically, not only an insult to her, but “God”, and to his own beliefs.
Let's put this in context.
A person who has a pattern of sexual behavior problems ends up with his e-mail on a site facilitating and promoting affairs. Instantaneously, the objective is to attack not just religion, but conservatives as a whole.
Meanwhile, that same e-mail leak exposed thousands of government e-mail accounts from employees with security clearance and who accessed these sites from their government computers.
Crickets.
That's the context I see.
He molests one of his sisters, probably prays to Jesus, molests another, prays to Jesus, molests another, prays to Jesus, then finally molests yet another, and then what does he do? Pray to Jesus. Lmfao.
Why are you laughing about that?
It's like having some 500 pounded dough-monster preaching to someone else how he needs to get on a diet because they're fat.
Where has Josh Duggar stated that he is A) free of flaw and B) derided others for their flaws?
Let's say I am fat and I am telling you that I am concerned about your unhealthy eating choices. Does the fact that I am also fat have anything to do with the legitimacy of my concern for you or the assessment that you are being unhealthy?
If I am skinny, can I then turn around and lecture you for being fat?
While no one is perfect in behavior and demeanor, Christians are generally accepting of the idea that human beings are imperfect and that even those who seek improvement are flawed in their own right.
This is the sad logic with Christianity. If a person killed dozens of people, but accepted Jesus and God, then went and did it again, but repented and turned back to Jesus, he would be accepted into Heaven, no second thoughts. In the eyes of God he'd be considered more worthy for a bliss after-life than an actual good person with an actual good track record in life.
That's not really how it works. That may be how some people -want- to believe it works, but you will not find much comprehensive scriptural support for that idea. In fact, Matthew 23 is pretty much Jesus' answer to people who think this way.
Generally, Christians are to reserve ultimate judgment to God. We don't get to decide who goes to heaven/hell/etc.
I, also, fall closer to the scriptural interpretation advanced by the Jehova's Witness, oddly enough, after my own independent study and analysis. Jehova's Witness do not believe Jesus claimed to be God and they generally reject the notion of the Trinity (an idea largely advanced by Paul).
I also challenge the notion that 'accepting Jesus' is part of the requirements for heaven. Jesus was the Messiah, to be sure, but he was not a replacement for God and he was not meant to be a sacrificial stand-in. He was meant to be a canary in the coal mine. He was put to death because of corruption within the religious establishment which collaborated with the much-despised Roman government to execute a political enemy. Thus, the 'shroud of the temple' was torn and the Jewish establishment forever undermined.
Again - Matthew 23 is a key chapter to read if one is to understand what it was Jesus came to 'save us' from. He wasn't meant to be a personal savior in the sense he has been made into.
But if you remove the personal salvation of Jesus - you essentially have Judaic Anarchy, and early Christians had to distinguish themselves in some manner.
Meanwhile people who are genuinely good people are going to burn in Hell for all of eternity simply because they don't believe in Jesus, his Jewish son that he apparently loved & let get tortured and killed to compensate for peoples’ sins despite being omni-everything and able to find an alternative. So fatherly and benevolent. What a merciful God.
You are speaking as if you are presenting me with some kind of argument.
In order to put your reading comprehension to use, you must first read, young one.
You've simply read what people say about the Bible, and never actually sat down and read it. I don't mean reading an excerpt here and there - I mean actually sit down and read from it.
You assume.
I'll make this simple. I am a Christian who does not believe Jesus died for our sins. Find me the story in the Bible that supports your assertion that Jesus did die because of my sins.
Bakame - if you're listening in, that's also your cue. I spent a long time last night writing a response to your post on that thread last night only to find the thread deleted when I went to post.
When you say moron are you referring to yourself? Because that's pretty stupid. Calling an Atheist (which I'm not, but nice assumption), a bigot in defense of Christianity, one of the biggest, most bigoted religions of all, is real cute. And then comparing it to racism...lmao.
Generally speaking, the people who like to reserve the right to applying the "bigot" label are, themselves, incapable of comprehending the irony of the situation.
Also I have no problem with people of faith, seeing as people of faith extend farther than Christianity ; )
Well, yes, I'm sure you are down with purchasing **** toys from the local market.
holy water tears on my pillowcase
