|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Mar 6th, 2003 10:08 AM | |
| mburbank |
Here's the ironic thing; appart from the many requirements you know about, ie. accepting Jesus, Baptism et al, God has one ultra necessary requirement without which you will never pass the Pearly Gates. And it's a secret. See, that's the test. If you really, really, really were follwing God, you'd just know. Word on the street is it has something to do with socks and my involve feeding ducks. Jesus knew what it was. And you better get to figerin' cause if you die without taking care of it... well, lets just say you better bring the makings for s'mores. |
| Mar 5th, 2003 10:21 PM | |
| Protoclown |
I don't know how I managed to not notice the updates to this thread for so long... Actually Ronnie, I HAVE personally accepted Christ. I just don't think that EVERYONE necessarily should. I realize that you can't possibly understand my point of view, and I also know that in accepting others' beliefs with just as much potential validation as my own, I am obviously not "truly" accepting Christ and his "MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY" ultimatum. I DO in fact reject YOUR version of Christ, and YOUR version of God, I find them twisted and vile, and I have no room in my heart for them. So be it. The God I believe in made a Heaven big enough for you, me, Max Burbank, Mockery, and many other good-hearted souls of widely varying beliefs. I put MY faith in something better than a God obsessed with fickle pride and almost arbitarily assigned eternal damnation. Think of the most kind-hearted and generous person you know. Do you think they have the potential in their heart to sentence a GOOD person to ETERNAL damnation for even a SLIGHTLY different set of theological beliefs as their own? And don't you think GOD would be somewhat BETTER than the best person YOU know? Do you think GOD would be so petty as to sentence HUMAN BEINGS, for whom years, months, weeks, days, and HOURS are a significant measure of time, yet a fleeting hiccup to the INFINITY of God, to ETERNAL DAMNATION?? Could we not, say, "learn our lesson" in perhaps a mere million billion years instead? And given this statement you made earlier: "Where I stand in relation to you is irrelevant. Where I stand in realtion to GOD is. " WHY are you so concerned with where OTHER people are going to spend eternity anyway? Where I or Burbank end up is irrelevant, you should be more concerned about YOU rather than constantly telling us where we're supposedly going to end up. Ooooh! And now I see that we have to be BAPTIZED on top of everything else to get into heaven, according to Italian Stereotype. So Italian...does this mean that even if you HAVE done everything Ronnie says you need to do and have accepted Christ and think that all other religions are full of mistaken fools, you will STILL go to hell if you haven't had a priest dunk your head in water?? |
| Mar 5th, 2003 04:23 PM | |
| The_Rorschach |
I'm going to declare Burbank the winner here. For one thing Ronnie, lets assume Christ was the son of God (not a hard assumption, I do so daily), he didn't lord his power over anyone or force them to believe. Nor did he prioritize his followers into sects. He said "My sheep know my voice" and I think that is Burb's main point. Standing in condemnation or judgement of others is the antithesis of being a good Chrisitan. Point of fact, it's actually usurption of your Saviours role, and I can only think of one Biblical personality that sought that sort of thing. Needless to say, he isn't doing well. Out of curiousity. If there was a religious Mock war, would it be called a Jihad? |
| Feb 28th, 2003 01:59 PM | |
| ItalianStereotype | well, ronnie is correct in part here. you do have to accept christ to be a christian. you can say that you are a christian, but the only way to make it complete is to at least be baptised. if you dont do this you arent a christian, but i am sure there are other ways to heaven. i really doubt god is going to let the jews burn in hell since they still worship him. |
| Feb 28th, 2003 01:28 PM | |
| mburbank |
Naldo does not see his relationship with God as a religion. All that other funky shuck and Jive is religion. Golden calfs are religion. What he does is embrace the Truth. Okay. Lets say for the sake of argument you don't judge. You make a judgement. You know the TRUTH, proto is WRONG and if he dies he'll go to hell. Just the facts maam. You better hope you are absolutely right because fi you aren't, then you are INCREDABLY judgmental. And just for the record? I never thought you had the actual power to send someone to hell. I think you look at someones belief s and actions and think you know wether they're going to Hell olr not. I think only God knows that, and our understanding of his will is imperfect. "Being a "nice guy" is not the standard in which GOD will judge us. I think you know that. " I have no idea of what the afterlife has in it if anything, but if there is one I think being a nice guy should be just about the main requirement. Being nice is HARD! I'm completely serious here, Nalds, if niceness ie. compassion and caring aren't the main things God is looking for that his priorities are way to human for my taste. Obediance as the principal virtue sounds kind of nasty to me. Nald. If saying you have 'issues' with the death penalty constitutes doubt for you then you haven't experienced a whole lot of doubt. What ARE these issues? How do you FEEL when a man is put to death by the state? What are you motivated to DO when someone who's spent years on death row is proven innocent? When W. mocked the Cristianity of thhe Texas woman on death row did you hear about it? Did it cause you to think about his clarity on the issue? What have the 'issues' meant to you? I have concidered the idea that Jesus might actully be the messiah. So what? If that's all I can say about it, it doesn't amount to much. And if I say I don't see you as a person who experiences doubt, Naldo, that's becuase based on what I read that you write, that's WHAT I THINK. Now possibly I'm off base. But I'm certainly mot lieing. Only a child thinks lieing, disagreeing and being wrong are just three ways of saying the same thing. Lieing is about intent. I think YOU know that. Know what that means? Every time you call me a liar, it's a LIE. Because you know I'm expressing an opinion, not deliberatley stating something I don't believe, and yet you actively CHOSE to use the word liar. You have the INTENT. "Many of Christ's disciples spoke against those who were of what they viewed as a false religion or who had views that did not agree with words of Christ. Were they wrong? " In my reading of the Gospels, the apostles spend their entire time with Jesus getting his teachings wrong over and over. It's one of the primary ways he taught, and the fact he surrounded himself with hugely fallible people was a choice and a statement about the nature of Man, something He himself had chosen to take part in. If you believe he was divine, anyway. I mean, not much point in taking on flesh if you don't take on it's weakness. So unless I missed the prt where after Jesus died a wand was waved and the apostles became perfect, yeah, I think they were wrong. That's what I think. Not a lie. I have asked you VERY direct questions and you dodge them. You've already wayed in on where Proto is going if he dies without a change of heart. Me too, right? And everybody on earth who doesn't accept Christ. You see that as a fact the same way I see gravity. Am I right? So here's my direct questions. 1.)Do you ever in the least little corner of your heart doubt that? 2.) Do you ever wonder WHY God wants it that way? 3.) Do you ever wonder about what this says about God's nature? And don't just say yes or no, that's begging for people to missinterpret you. Explicate. Ponder this. Maybe the reason you are so 'missunderstood' on this board has less to do with our knee jerk reactions than you think. Maybe it's because you relish your outsider role, and you don't try very hard to be understood. |
| Feb 28th, 2003 08:03 AM | |
| Ronnie Raygun |
I don't follow a religion, Vibe. Maxi, "1.) Okay, what about Proto makes him less a 'Real" Christian than you?" You can't be "less". You either are, or you're not. Proto, has said in the past that you don't have to accept Christ to go to heaven. It's very, very simple. In order to be a CHRISTian you have to truly accept CHRIST as your savior. And the acceptance of CHRIST is the only way to the Father. "And does his fake Christianty mean that should he suddenly die of a massive stroke, or being struck by a falling anvil, anything that took him by surprise, that he would go to hell? Forever." Yes. "'Cause I think that's on the childish side. You know. For God. What with Proto being a basically nice guy and just having a little in common with a child molester." If you think GOD is childish that's your problem. I truly feel bad for you. Being a "nice guy" is not the standard in which GOD will judge us. I think you know that. "You've made that statement often, but what do you MEAN by it. I have never heard you admit to a mistake, and error in judgemnt , a doubt in any speciffic way. Likewise, you attribute to your icons (Bush, Rush, et al) a similar virtual infallability." You have seen me admit to a mistake you just don't want to remember because it would detract from your argument. I know for a fact that I told you I had issues with the death penalty and that was only a few weeks ago. Doesn't that qualify as a "doubt". See Maxi, no matter what I say you will disagree. "See, here you make a seriously blind mistake. It isn't the claims that make a person moral. I can't think of the exact passage at the moment but I believe Jesus had something to say about judging by a man's actions." Well, then....I'm talking about your actions here on I-Mockery. You can make any claim you wish because you are not bound by morality.....the passage you were refering to was the one about the "fruits"......probably Matthew 7:20. As far as judging goes, I'm not ruling over anyone, I'm not damning anyone to hell, I don't and will never have that power......and don't want it. Many of Christ's disciples spoke against those who were of what they viewed as a false religion or who had views that did not agree with words of Christ. Were they wrong? "Never in a single sentence, I suppose." This is where you go wrong. I am an honest person. Do you disagree with that? .....Now, if you want to know what my views are just ask me. Don't take a bunch of sentences from a bunch of different conversations and use them out of context. You know what you WANT to believe, so you look for statements, by me, that you can compile to form a belief about me that's simply not accurate. Really Max...it's not. "But there's logic. Here's what you have said. You are a real american and Christian. Speciffic other people here are not. Real Christians go to heaven. Those who do not accept Jesus go to hell. You? God's Grace. Other's here? Hellbound unless they 'have a change of heart'. I accept that you see these as conditions of fact beyond your influence. It doesn't chnage where you stand in relation to us." Where I stand in relation to you is irrelevant. Where I stand in realtion to GOD is. "I have stated on more than one occasion that it's not yours to judge and that you sjhouldn't be inlcined to. You feel that God has laid out a set of rules that allows you to determine a persons destintion in the afterlife." I don't know how many different ways I can put this. I am not condemning anyone. I don't have that power. I will state the obvious and continue to express my views. "You arfe also very eager to call people 'liar's' when their interpretation of events isn't the same as yours, which is less than charitable, an ugly accusation, and reveals a highly simplistic vision of different viewpoints." You have been known to lie. Here earlier when you said that I never had any doubt concerning anything I stand for......Just a couple of weeks ago we were talking about the death penalty.....and you conveniently failed to mention that. |
| Feb 27th, 2003 05:57 PM | |
| Vibecrewangel |
LOL Ronnie - "Religion is just man made and flawed. " How then can you say without any doubt that the one you follow is the correct one? |
| Feb 27th, 2003 05:11 PM | |
| mburbank |
1.) Okay, what about Proto makes him less a 'Real" Christian than you? And does his fake Christianty mean that should he suddenly die of a massive stroke, or being struck by a falling anvil, anything that took him by surprise, that he would go to hell? Forever. 'Cause I think that's on the childish side. You know. For God. What with Proto being a basically nice guy and just having a little in common with a child molester. "Just as much as any other man." You've made that statement often, but what do you MEAN by it. I have never heard you admit to a mistake, and error in judgemnt , a doubt in any speciffic way. Likewise, you attribute to your icons (Bush, Rush, et al) a similar virtual infallability. "I make no major moral claims for myself." -me Yes, which gives you free reign to say and do anything. That makes you a weaker man, not stronger. -you See, here you make a seriously blind mistake. It isn't the claims that make a person moral. I can't think of the exact passage at the moment but I believe Jesus had something to say about judging by a man's actions. "Real Christian...yes. Real American....yes. "going to heaven while pretty much everyone else here is currently damned"..... Not at all, and you know it. This is where your little self proclaimed moral depravity kicks in. It's O.K. for you to lie because you don't make "major moral claims". I've NEVER said nor insinuated anything like that. " -You Never in a single sentence, I suppose. But there's logic. Here's what you have said. You are a real american and Christian. Speciffic other people here are not. Real Christians go to heaven. Those who do not accept Jesus go to hell. You? God's Grace. Other's here? Hellbound unless they 'have a change of heart'. I accept that you see these as conditions of fact beyond your influence. It doesn't chnage where you stand in relation to us. I have stated on more than one occasion that it's not yours to judge and that you sjhouldn't be inlcined to. You feel that God has laid out a set of rules that allows you to determine a persons destintion in the afterlife. You arfe also very eager to call people 'liar's' when their interpretation of events isn't the same as yours, which is less than charitable, an ugly accusation, and reveals a highly simplistic vision of different viewpoints. |
| Feb 27th, 2003 11:43 AM | |
| Ronnie Raygun |
"It does." I'm glad you agree. "But that isn't what you're talking about at all, unless you're lumping Proto together with Child Molesters in your deffinition of "Fake Christians"" In my opinion he has something in common with them in that he is not really a Christian....He's not, in my opinion, like them in any other way and my words are in no meant to be an insult. I'm not saying he's the same as a child molester except in that one sense. "I'll leave aside the fact that you just ruled out a prominent feature of Christianity, the possibility of contrition." No I haven't. "You don't like the taste of it, but it's clear when you use phrases like 'real american' and 'real christian', you're a zealot. And zealotry? A pretty tiny box. But it's always good to know you are sure enough you are without sin to be comfortable casting stones." I'm not uncomfortable with that term. The term "zealot" does not have a negative connotation. To be zealous can be a good thing just as much as a bad thing. And it's not a tiny box, you should know since you spend most of your time in one. Also, I sin plenty. Just as much as any other man. Being sinless is impossible and wouldn't get to any closer to GOD anyway. Sin itself really doesn't even factor in. I give it all to GOD and am forgiven. This can happen when you have a real relationship with Christ. And believe me, you aren't the first person to refer to a Christian as a zealot. It's actually a compliment. "A.) I make no pretense I'm not. Ronnie, in case you may have missed it, I am tweaking your nose on purpose." You're not "tweaking" anything. Just rambling. It's fun to watch spin around in your little box. "B.) While a little adolescent, (this is affter ll a site for mockery) my aim is to to hold a mirror up to Ronnies Hypocrisy." You haven't. I've never claimed to be anything I'm not. I don't hold people to higher standards than I do myself. Just because you insist on repeating something over and over again, doesn't mean that they magically turn into facts. "I make no major moral claims for myself." Yes, which gives you free reign to say and do anything. That makes you a weaker man, not stronger. "Ronnie claims to be a 'real Christian', 'real American', going to heaven while pretty much everyone else here is currently damned, and yet his behavior is pretty much the same as mine." Real Christian...yes. Real American....yes. "going to heaven while pretty much everyone else here is currently damned"..... Not at all, and you know it. This is where your little self proclaimed moral depravity kicks in. It's O.K. for you to lie because you don't make "major moral claims". I've NEVER said nor insinuated anything like that. "Except I'm funnier. And more lucid. And know more about religion." You very well might know more about "religion". Religion is just man made and flawed. That's you problem, you don't have a relationship with GOD. I don't know much about Islam or hinduism and don't really care to. "C.) Ronnie begs for it. He's here as a negative atttention seeker, I'm just he'pin. I once spent a series of posts trying to get him to say why he was here, and got nowhere realistic. He claimed he was here to educate, which stretches credulity. I think he's here to Mock, but can't admit it even to himself, becuase Mocking and Gloating are unChristian passtimes." I'm not a mocker. I'm here for a different point of view and because there are many intelligent people here like Kevin, Ror, and yourself that are my stongest sources of info. coming from the left....though Ror's not really from the left. "D.) Ronnie holds the one and only belief I find most unsettling, appauling, bizarre, barbaric and dangerous. That a Supreme being responsible for all creation would feature Eternal Damnation as part of his plan. Like most moderns who believe in Hell, he's fairly certain it's just for other folks. That makes me literally ill, and I can't see that opinion expressed without attacking it." The fact that it makes you ill might mean something....you are be convicted by GOD. Don't let pride be the death of you. I AM NOT TALKING DOWN TO YOU!! I mean these words with utter sincerity. Get it?! "Nalds will tell you that means I hate Christians." No, I don't. You don't speak for me. "E.) He needs it. He wouldn't be here if he didn't." I like it here, just like you do. "F.) It probably makes him pray for me. It nver hurts to hedge your bets." I'm sorry you see it that way. "G.) It's irresistably fun." It is for me to. You guys are the best. |
| Feb 27th, 2003 09:42 AM | |
| mburbank |
Oh, I'm totally baiting him. Absolutely. Absolutely 'Naldo. AND it's a little cruel, AND I take some measure of pleasure in it. A few things. A.) I make no pretense I'm not. Ronnie, in case you may have missed it, I am tweaking your nose on purpose. B.) While a little adolescent, (this is affter ll a site for mockery) my aim is to to hold a mirror up to Ronnies Hypocrisy. I make no major moral claims for myself. Ronnie claims to be a 'real Christian', 'real American', going to heaven while pretty much everyone else here is currently damned, and yet his behavior is pretty much the same as mine. Except I'm funnier. And more lucid. And know more about religion. C.) Ronnie begs for it. He's here as a negative atttention seeker, I'm just he'pin. I once spent a series of posts trying to get him to say why he was here, and got nowhere realistic. He claimed he was here to educate, which stretches credulity. I think he's here to Mock, but can't admit it even to himself, becuase Mocking and Gloating are unChristian passtimes. D.) Ronnie holds the one and only belief I find most unsettling, appauling, bizarre, barbaric and dangerous. That a Supreme being responsible for all creation would feature Eternal Damnation as part of his plan. Like most moderns who believe in Hell, he's fairly certain it's just for other folks. That makes me literally ill, and I can't see that opinion expressed without attacking it. Nalds will tell you that means I hate Christians. Which is of course, whooey. In my view, any Christian who does not struggle daily with the concept of damnation and what it might mean about God is lacking in most Christian virtues. E.) He needs it. He wouldn't be here if he didn't. F.) It probably makes him pray for me. It nver hurts to hedge your bets. G.) It's irresistably fun. |
| Feb 26th, 2003 05:56 PM | |
| Anonymous |
no one liked my haiku 
|
| Feb 26th, 2003 03:27 PM | |
| The_Rorschach |
Eh Well, as far as I can tell, Ronnie has been farely fundamental for the most part. I'm only going to respond to Burbie's last comment Burbank: It does. But that isn't what you're talking about at all, unless you're lumping Proto together with Child Molesters in your deffinition of "Fake Christians" or unless when you say someone isn't a 'real Christian' you don't neccesarily mean they are 'fake christians.' Well, Paul encouraged the Church not to judge one another, but be aware of whem they stray away from the scriptures and into heresy (my word, one never once used in the Bible). If a person did such a thing, they were considered 'false witnesses' i.e. fake christians. The first step in dealing with them is to talk it out, if no accord can be reached, the second is to stop holding fellowship with the individual, but never to judge and never to hold past transgressions against them in case they return to the doctrines. As near as I can tell, that whats Ronnie has been insinuating, but not in so many words. Burbank: You don't like the taste of it, but it's clear when you use phrases like 'real american' and 'real christian', you're a zealot. And zealotry? A pretty tiny box. But it's always good to know you are sure enough you are without sin to be comfortable casting stones. Well, I prefer real California cheese to imitation Craft singles on my subs, and I enjoy conversating on politics with those who actually follow the news as opposed to those just have knee-jerk reaction to headlines, so I think there is room enough for middle ground somewhere before reaching the zealotry stage. Furthermore, I think you're purposely trying to bait Ronnie into saying something that would suggest all he knows of Christianity he learned from commentaries and O'Reilly. I know you're educated on the subject, so I can't help but think its slightly malicious of you to torture the kid like this. I'm sure even he must admit to himself that he has many hypocritical traits (politically and religiously speaking), what purpose does it serve to rub his nose in them? ---One more thing Sspad: "Eternal solitude" Wow, man. The political correctness movement has gone too far. Even the fundamentalists are coming up with euphemisms for their own Hell. Ronnie fucked this one up. The Book of Hebrews refers to 'Outer Darkness' and I was almost sure this was what he meant at the time. Once a person accepts Christ he is saved from eternal damnation. God keeps His word even if His followers don't. If they recant, and sin without repentance and turn their eyes from Him, they won't go to hell. Instead they will be banished from the Kingdom of God, to the surrounding 'Outer Darkness.' It's actually pretty interesting, and I wish the Bible alluded to it more than just a few times in the New Testament because its certainly insightful. |
| Feb 26th, 2003 02:17 PM | |
| Anonymous |
i think your god sucks he doesnt give me free crap what is up with that |
| Feb 26th, 2003 02:17 PM | |
| mburbank |
It does. But that isn't what you're talking about at all, unless you're lumping Proto together with Child Molesters in your deffinition of "Fake Christians" or unless when you say someone isn't a 'real Christian' you don't neccesarily mean they are 'fake christians.' In which case your use of language borders on Clintonesque. I'll leave aside the fact that you just ruled out a prominent feature of Christianity, the possibility of contrition. You don't like the taste of it, but it's clear when you use phrases like 'real american' and 'real christian', you're a zealot. And zealotry? A pretty tiny box. But it's always good to know you are sure enough you are without sin to be comfortable casting stones. |
| Feb 26th, 2003 01:18 PM | |
| Ronnie Raygun |
"Real Christians. That says it all, right there. You can't let God separate the Goats and the Sheep, can you? You just need to jump in and do it for Him." That's silly. I'm obviously not capable. I'm only a man. GOD is GOD. It's a fact that their are fake Christians. Just look at all the child molesting preists and the church leadership that defends them. Doesn't that make sense, Maxi? |
| Feb 24th, 2003 08:36 PM | |
| AChimp |
 Ronnie almost made my signature with that eternal solitude line. Almost.
|
| Feb 24th, 2003 08:18 PM | |
| ItalianStereotype |
ok, apparently you dont even need ::these:: to come off as completely gay. if you think that you are all cool and funny with your picture of beavis and what not, you shouldnt be saying shit about MY grasp on reality. |
| Feb 24th, 2003 07:06 PM | |
| Skulhedface |
And I believe if I had asked, I would've asked someone that could handle even a rudimentary grasp on reality. Anything else? You bore me. |
| Feb 24th, 2003 06:55 PM | |
| ItalianStereotype |
::tries to put actions into words and only comes off sounding really gay:: i dont recall giving you my two cents, i believe i was telling you how it is. |
| Feb 24th, 2003 06:21 PM | |
| Skulhedface | ::gives you your two cents back:: You can keep it. It wasn't worth it. Thanks for playing! |
| Feb 24th, 2003 01:32 PM | |
| mburbank | I don't care much for him either. |
| Feb 24th, 2003 12:59 PM | |
| ItalianStereotype | no point, i just hate the guy... |
| Feb 24th, 2003 09:31 AM | |
| mburbank |
Eye tie, your point being? Both parties are rife with the sort of opportunistic crapola Sharpton is famous for, although admittedly he represents the edge of the envelope. He has fine company in Trent Lott and Coble (or however one spells his name) the representatibve heading the Judiciary commitee for homeland security who thinks internment camps are a good idea. |
| Feb 24th, 2003 03:32 AM | |
| ItalianStereotype |
im sorry, i was under the impression that nobody gives a fuck what your take on ANY situation is. did anybody see al sharpton addressing the democratic national convention? aside from blaming republicans for everything from 9/11 to AIDS, he accused bush of trying to merge church and state....the irony....the hypocrisy.... |
| Feb 24th, 2003 02:54 AM | |
| Skulhedface |
My take on the whole thing is that Falwell and Robertson don't care what you believe, they are trying to tell us, Americans as a whole, that we are sinners, and I agree. No one's perfect. However, my problem with it is that at a time when the world should've (rightly so) been in mourning, we have oppotunistic weasels advancing their own agendas. Let the homosexuals and secular people of the world live with it, and if they do die and end up getting on The Big Guy's bad side, that's THEIR problem. Being atheist myself, it's hard to NOT put this in a way that's not touchy, but here goes anyway: I believe that everyone should be able to live how they want (WITHIN REASON, I DO NOT ADVOCATE MURDER, PEDOPHILIA OR THE LIKE) and LET LIVE. My beef with the religious right has been their nagging fixation on living people's lives for them. Jesus Saves. Well, what if we CHOOSE not to be saved? God did give us FREE WILL, after all. I respect people that are religious, if you believe in God, well good! I'm not being sarcastic, some people choose to have religion in their lives, I'm not God, I won't take that from you. But the fanatics like Falwell and Robertson bother me. People who call me a baby killer because I'm pro-choice. Well, I'm not the one pulling an unborn baby out of the womb. I'm not the teenage mother who's getting her unborn baby "removed at convenience" because "Daddy will get mad". I believe that ultimately, whether I agree with it or not, IT'S NOT MY CHOICE TO MAKE, THEREFORE IT'S NOT MY RIGHT TO CONDEMN SUCH A PERSON FROM MAKING THAT CHOICE. Falwell and Robertson are doing NOTHING more than advancing their own agenda. THEY hate homosexuals, THEY hate the secular.. if this was GOD'S beef, wouldn't Afghanistan be suffering 10 okagues by now? (Because the first commandment basically says that God hates competition). I know this isn't true but let me use the stereotype anyway.. If God had that big a beef (before they die) with homosexuals, wouldn't Greece be wiped off the map Noah's Ark style, or at least like he took out Sodom? (and again, I'm just using an example, I am smart enough to know that Greece is not filled to the borders with homosexuals). Falwell and Robertson have a problem with these people, being bigoted as they are, and they are trying to use God as a tool to scare the deviants. People need to stop taking their religion into battle. Good God. |
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | |
