Wirehead Studios

Yeah, that does tell me something? It tells me that The Judeo-Christian ?God? does not like knowledge. His subjects were immediately punished for achieving knowledge, by being ejected from Paradise. Generations later, when God sent his son Jesus down to earth, he was sacrificed in an attempt to redeem humanity from its sins, including our original sin, enlightenment. This is why most Christians are completely ignorant and blinded by their superstitions (points no fingers). They?re all sheep and the Lord is their shepherd. Besides, nudity is nothing to be ashamed of? Of course, with the religious bias that everyone on this message board shows, I?m sure that the ?Christian Mentality? runs deep. Genocidal rampages are a-okay in God?s view, but once someone disrobes or has sex then they?re going straight to Hell!

Being naked is a personal choice that harms absolutely no one. And in that sense, anyone should have the right to do it. Stop pushing your backwards Christian morality on the country and let so-called consensual crimes be left up to the participants. Freedom was what this country was originally founded on, after all.

Is it just me, or do you have to rant on christianity every possible chance?

There are VERY few biblical references in this thread, and I think I'd like to keep it that way.

Being naked is a personal choice, but that doesn't mean I want to see someone's pimply ass.

Keeping your clothes on is much the same as keeping the volume on my stereo down.
The neighbors don't want to hear it, and I don't want to see them naked.

Now there's a couple ladies down the street I wouldn't mind seeing, but I rather prefer enjoying nudity in private.

Is it just me, or do others have to attempt to use outdated scripture to prove invalid points every possible chance they get? Chosen morality has nothing to do with what is or isn't publicly acceptable.

Then, if you can persuade Draco and Phoenix to not bring it up, I'm sure Malchia won't either. Until then, do what Jesus did and turn the other cheek.

I just find it very interesting that Lord Malchia hates a God that he doesn't even believe exists, and uses every opportunity he gets to flame Christianity.  Also, by the comments he's posted, I'm quite convinced that he's ignorant as to what Christians actually believe, as opposed to what he thinks we believe.  Then again, he's expressed no interest in genuine understanding and acceptence; his only desire is that we convert to his system of beliefs and abandon ours since we're obviously so backwards and behind the times in his mind.  We're wrong, and he's right because "he says so", and he can bring up a whole host of justifications to support his rationale, the same way as we can quote bible verses to support ours.  Funny how that door swings both ways, no?

McDeth:  That's a very obvious attempt at a "STFU", and I won't stand for it.   See, we Christians are always accused of wanting to stamp out everyone's freedoms, when those who dislike our religion and accuse us of this turn around and do the same to us at every turn.  They don't want to deal with us, they want us to disappear and go away.  Sorry, it's not going to happen, unless of course God were to snatch every believer off the face of the planet at once, then you won't have to worry about our exercising of our freedom of religion ever inconveniencing you ever again.  Until that sort of thing comes to pass, we will NOT relinquish our rights to believe what we choose AND discuss it freely.  Any attempt to silence us will result in the same kind of backlash you've witnessed recently in the polls.

Like us or not, we're not going to back down any longer.  We have fought and died for the right to follow our beliefs in the past.  We STILL die for them around the world every day, and if that's what is required for us to have our freedom to worship our God - to be imprisoned, to be persecuted, tortured and killed, that is, to suffer the same sort of fate as our Lord then it is an HONOR to do so.  Perhaps you're not capable of grasping this sort of passion because you don't love anything so much in your life?  Who can say.  All we want is to not have secularism rammed down our throats in the same way you don't want our religion rammed down yours.  Sure we want to bring people to know God as we know Him, but if you choose not to that is your choice.  Stop trying to take away ours, and our right to express our beliefs.  You want tolerence?  Practice what you preach before demanding it of others.

You really run the risk of skin cancer any time you're out in the sun for a prolonged period of time.  To be honest, with the work that my father does (irrigation,) I'm really surprised he hasn't contracted skin cancer.  He's out in the sun nearly every day for 8 - 10 hours at a time.

That said, drink you water people!  And be sure to wear sunblock with at least an SPF level of 45.  Wearing sun-glasses with UV protective lenses and a nice, shady hat are good as well  ^_^

Obviously you are frustrated with Christianity and I honeslty understand that cuz like I was disgussing with some people in #wirehead there are so many different christian beliefs out there that are in my opinion completely full of bull or exagerates the original point to something that makes it false. Such asyou mentioned in one of your reponses how some think having sex will send you to hell. WRONGO! God CREATED sex. Also if you sin you dont go to hell because man is naturally sinful.  And I could go on and on with a huge list of false interpretations or false teachings, but seeing how you hate religion in general.......christianity......whatever......I doubt you want to read all the examples.
But dude sheesh being christian doesnt make you arrogant. And not everything in the bible is how i determine my thinking in actions. Look at it more of a guideline to my beliefs. I decide what I agree with or not. I was just merely giving an example from the bible relating to nudity. Doesn't mean what the bible said made my decision for me. I just don't think nude beaches are a good idea in the first place.

Um...if you bring up your beliefs, then the opposing side has the right to bring up theirs, yes? Draco brought up a Christian arguement because she is christian. I respect that arguement. Malchia brought up an anti-christian arguement. His is respected as well. So in all honesty, it wasn't a "STFU". Rather a, "if you can convince just one side to stop preaching, the other will lose interest and stop preaching also" kind of thing.

I never learn more than from a debate, so please, by all means, don't "STFU". :)


And to get back on topic, I think Kain has made the most rationally acceptable arguement here. He is absolutely correct. This bill does not force people to go topless. It just says they can if they wish. GG Kain. ;)

True, but there are certain bits of us that are paler than other bits!

I don't want those bits to get red raw, let along peeling etc.

Lighten up everybody. maybe we should all deathmatch in the raw, to see if we play better or not.

 :evil:

The "turn the other cheek" comment made it sound like it was.  My apoligies.  :)

RELIGION IS IRRELEVANT! This is purely a nipple issue. Men can show theirs in public, women can't. I doubt that men in California are really thinking, "Oh that female has nice, firm mammaries. She should be capable of produncing strong, healthy offsping".They're more than likely thinking "mmmmmmmmmmmm..."

Sham: I've done that. Still got my ass kicked and it hurt a lot more. Don't recommend it. :D

 :offtopic:  but...

I thought everybody did that... :shifty:

No, thats just the slippy RL :ownage:

Perhaps the reason those "bits" are paler, is because they are covered nearly 24/7?  Personally I don't see any reason to oppose the bill.  If it were saying people could run around stark naked, yes I'd have a problem with it.  The bible may have said that Adam and Eve covered themselves, but it never specified explicitly that Eve covered her breasts.


Draco, do you realize that the "effect on kids of this generation" is entirely cultural?  The only reason it isn't "okay to do shit like that" is because society has decreed it so.  If everyone went around topless, eventually no one would have a problem with it, and since it would be an everyday occurrence, men *would* eventually become inured to it and wouldn't go ga-ga every time a woman walked by with no shirt on.  Look at Africa (yes this point was brought up before, but I didn't see anyone countering it), do you see all the men getting hard-ons when a woman walks by with no top on?  no, they care about as much as they do when another guy walks by with no top on.

You don't have a problem with men walking around topless... why?  because society says that's okay.  You do have a problem with women walking around topless... why?  because society says it's not.  I also find it amusing how you associate being topless with being naked.  Funny, I walk around in my swim trunks and don't feel terribly naked.

"Why bother in the first place"?  When you are born, are you born wearing clothes?  You imply it's a "bother" to wear less clothing.  I find this humorous.  Men currently go around topless because it's more comfortable on a warm day, or they're working hard (or working out) and want to let their sweat cool them naturally like it was intended to do, instead of being hot AND wearing a sweat-drenched shirt.

It's not your god that I hate... How can I hate something that doesn't exist? It?s the corrupting people that claim to follow your god that I dislike. You?re right about one thing at least, your kind is backwards and behind the times. You?re following an ancient scripture that barely worked in its own time. On top of that, you don?t see it as just a set of moral codes and philosophy to follow; you take everything it says very literally. Your mind set is shroud in superstition and you don?t dare get out of line with it, because somewhere sitting up in the sky is an omnipotent old man just waiting to condemn you to eternal suffering. Our civilization obviously cannot make any progress with that kind of thinking. You forget, I?ve been around for a few thousand years, so I know what your religion is about, far more so than most that actually practice it do. At least I?m not constantly interpreting Bible verses, trying to pass myself off as some Christ figure with a running theme of resurrection present in my online persona.

Draco, I realize your point. What Christianity truly is and what it is today are very different things. Through human manipulation, hierarchies have sprung up and with them have come bogus interpretations. That?s why the convenient Christians of today absolutely despise homosexuals, for instance. These are the kinds of troubles that occur when following something that you will never know the full truth about though. Everything looses meaning in translation, not to mention the controversial parts that have been edited or completely removed to keep the flock from being stained.

DAMN, there's so many holes in that statement...

First of all, you immediately dismiss every Christian as the right-wing nut job Christians that most other Christians hate.  Almost every Christian I know does not take the scripture literally, but instead does simply use it as a set of moral and philosophical guidelines.

Secondly, very few Christians believe that God is simply some old man up in the sky.  It's a dated, clich?d reference.

Third, you yourself claim to have been around for a few thousand years, yet immediately dismiss the possibility that Phoenix could possibly be anywhere near what he says he is - in fact, to me it sounds like you're inferring that he's some delusional 14 year old sitting at a keyboard.  Hypocrisy at it's best!

Fourth, for being someone who's been around for a few thousand years, you've developed a hyper-critical, inflammatory, elitist attitude.  Someone who has been around that long would have matured beyond that point, and understood that this sort of "discussion" (and I use the term loosely) is pointless.

Fifth, although I initially dismissed Woodsman's claims about you being dev/null, I did some research, and you walk like the afore-referenced duck, and quack like the afore-mentioned duck.  I smell duck.  IP addresses only lie when they don't match.  Matching IPs very seldom lie.

I don't think he did. Notice how he said "convenient Christians" instead of "all christians". As trigger happy as Malchia is on shooting all you guys down, I think you guys are also ready to shoot him down.  

Malchia has a point though, the law of the land is very similar to that of the Christian bible. Perhaps that might be a bit oppressive to those of us who aren't Christian.

And Jones, you also bring a good point to the debate. One cannot be critical of an entire group just because of the downfall of a select few. Christian principles, and I am sure Malchia can agree with this, are more or less healthy to live by. However, they do not work for everyone and that must be respected.

Geeze, someone's dense. I'll give you the pleasure of picking apart your post statement by statement.


I don't know anyone who is truly Christian, so I couldn't say. That certainly isn't the case here. Besides, I did not, and usually don't group all Christians together. As McDeth pointed out, exceptions are present in everything.


Um... Sarcasm, dude. There's that density showing again.


Sarcasm again... You might want to get a dictionary and look into the meaning of that word; SAR-CA-SIM


That's precisely what I'm implying... Thanks for finally realizing some of the subtle nuances in my statement. I guess it wasn't sarcasm though, so it wasn't a problem area of yours.


You are correct here. A debate such as this is pretty pointless from both sides. It's amusing though.


Wow, I bet you guys feel real special for figuring this out too, huh? If I was really in this to deceive anyone, I wouldn't have chosen a name tied to an already established character of mine. I would have gone with something more along the lines of Bald&Sexy of DaWoman McLife 333, for example.

News flash Lord/null we dont know the names of any of your dumb ass characters  so thats kind of a moot point.

Breasts are natural.

I'd much rather my son see breasts than someone's head ripped off in all its gory detail on broadcast TV.

Hell, I'd rather him see hardcore porn than that. I hate how our society's values are so skewed that sex has become an evil act, but violence is A-OK!

Edit: wow, I just read this thread all the way for the first time. Why the hell didn't someone report this? ;)

Dev/null, didn't you learn your lesson the first time? We unbanned you after awhile because we thought you'd learn. It looks like you didn't. You speak of others being dense, and not understanding anything. Look at yourself. You're nothing but a troll.

In other words, my way or the highway, right?  Funny, I thought that's what you hated Christianity for, yet in your arrogance you're too blind to look in the mirror and see that you are guilty of the exact same thing you accuse others of doing.  "We don't think like you, therefore we are wrong."  Why don't you wake up and smell what you're shoveling for a change instead of pretending it has no odor?
And you know nothing about staying the course and holding onto something instead of just following things because they're "New, Improved!"  Do you believe everything new is good?  Or that everything old is bad?  That's an awfully naive perspective if that's the case.  You might also re-study history a little bit.  See this thing called printed type?  You know what the first thing printed was?  The Bible.  The printing press, combined with that book you despise so much is responsible for printed text, which led to "knowledge being increased", just as it was (surprise) prophesied in the bible.  So how then is it out of date?  All of Western civilization has its roots in Christianity, whether you like it or not, and no matter how much they try to erase this from the history books it's the truth.  Modern civilization would not EXIST without it.

Also, we don't take everything literally.  The bible SHOULD be interpreted, but only to a point.  What we believe is that it was inspired by God, but penned by man's hand.  The difference between you and is that I can accept the premise that God's spirit could move people to write what He needed them to write in order to serve His purpose, some things being literal record, like geneologies, some things being spiritual and symbolic, but also clearly demarked as to which is which IF you study it.  Those symbols also hold meaning and lessons, but there's a difference between those who follow the school of Antioch thought as to how scripture should be interpreted, and those who follow Augustine thought.  You just don't like it no matter what so you don't bother, and write anyone off who believes the bible because you don't like Christianity.  Still, it doesn't matter how we interpret, or choose to live, you'll always be content to look down from your lofty perch there within the ivory tower of your "superior intellect".  I explain this only for the benefit of others here since I know it matters nothing to you.

Now this right there just shows the depths of your ignorance.  Here's God's true intent:

[/color]"John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved."

Gee, He SO wants to damn everyone to hell that he was willing to sacrifice his own son to torment and death, who also went willingly, to pay for the mistakes and screwups of us lesser creatures!  Sacrifice is an act of love, something I don't think you could possibly understand as I see no love in your heart, only bitterness and scorn.

Funny how it's done so well with so many Christians over the last few thousand years.  Tell me, when did atheism begin its rise exactly?  When did Christianity start declining?  Now tell me where prosperity reigned, and where stagnation reigns now?  History is against you on this, and you know it.  Progress was made with Christianity in full flower.


No, you just don't like me because I don't take your crap lying down, but you can't come out and say so directly.  All you can do is resort to sarcastic mocking and insults.  I don't care what you believe about me personally, I never have.  At least I don't go around saying all atheists are pompous bigoted stupid uneducated dolts for not following my religion.

I have gay friends.  I love them as much as I love my straight friends.  Sexual orientation is irrelevent to me.


No the problem is when you've already made up your mind about something and follow prejudice and preconception instead of having a genuine interest in learning what people truly think and feel.  You're content to hate, and have no intention of changing that.  If you want to know the truth you'd inquire, investigate, observe, and learn, but instead you scoff, denigrate, insult, and dismiss.

Then you have no right to sit in judgement of us.

Con:  I wanted to get this out into the open once and for all, which is why I didn't moderate this.  The best way to show someone for what they are is to let them shoot their mouth off and make an example out of themselves.[/color]

Hey guys, I have an urge to merge with the ultimate power of Greyskull!

By the Sword of Omens, I am He-Admin! THUNDER! THUNDER! THUNDERBANS HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Please, boss, can I ban him? Please? I'll leave some for you? Are you sure?

And here's a picture of a cat for your trouble.
http://www.pictureplates.com/anmpt016.jpg (http://www.pictureplates.com/anmpt016.jpg)

I so love bananas, I want one for airplane while I enjoy the lunch of my flavors.

monkies are cool

you could ban yourself for going SO off-topic . whats the matter with you man ?
stop smoking so much , its not good for you or the baby .

I really enjoyed this thread.

I think there is much interest in its development.

And besides Con, I am rather enjoying myself here. ;)

Or you could be banned for backseat modding.

Which is why you should coat yourself in a flame-retardent liquid, or at least apply sun-block with an SPF of 45, especially if you're going to the forum fire topless.

Did someone mention breasts? Because I love me some breasteses!

Mm, boobies.

Someone wants flames?  Go play Gen, Earth Soldiers, and use the Napalm Launcher.  We've got a release party don't you know?

Well, I'm not going to argue with you Malchia because of just one simple phrase. "You can't prove God exists.........BUT you can't prove he doesn't. So no matter what you or I say our civial argument ends in a stale mate. But try not to be so harsh and judging of other religions. I mean I know Christianity has so many odd ball off branches of its own beliefs and many of them are bull crap, but honestly we can't prove each other wrong or right. I only can go by faith in what I believe and the same goes for you. I'm not going to chastise you for not believing in god, but honestly try to have some more tolerance of different religions, especially christianity.

Enough talk about religion, when's the next flight? :thumb:

Let?s see if I can play catch up from my day of absence. I apologize ahead of time if I skip over anyone?s statement in this string of quotes and replies?


Lord Null? Hmmm, I kind of like that actually. Anyway, I normally wouldn?t expect any of you to hold such knowledge over my work, but in this instance I had posted the short excerpt on these very forums. If you look back through the Entertainment board (I believe), you?ll find it. It was a week when seemingly everyone was posting their work for peer reviewing. Strangely enough, mine didn?t receive any replies at all, despite being much better written than opposing ones posted before it. Oh, also in specific reply to the comment of ?your dumb ass characters?, I?d just like to call you an illiterate alcoholic. ;)

Despite being off of the actual banned list, my posting rights were never restored. That really doesn?t matter much though. At least you agree in part with my argument, that the morality in this country is skewed. I seem to be the only one attempting to find a root for this problem though.


Ah, and we finally get to your statements Phoenix. These will, of course, be the most tedious to reply to. Nevertheless, here we go... I don?t care if anyone follows my way, I enjoy the lonesome comfort anyway. If you would read the very statement that you quoted, I despise the corruption found within Christianity. Under all of that superstition and foolish dogma is a decent enough system, just as there is to be found in most religions.

Is everything new good? Is everything old bad? Certainly not, in some ways I?d even like to see a return to simpler times. But in the case of progression towards a realistic ideal society, I?d at least like to see less power given to the religious in this country. As you said, Western civilization is heavily tainted by Christianity and that is so much of the problem, especially in America. In a land of supposed freedom, where all claim to be equal, it?s rather sickening to see one certain group rule. Would modern civilization exist without this dampening effect? Of course. You do realize that the Roman Empire was doing just fine before Christianity, right? Whether or not something was prophesized in the Holy Bible is irrelevant. Within the pages of your book are many vague prophecies that have happened a multitude of times and will continue to, simply because they are so common through societies.


Is that the beginning of your autobiography? It?s pretty good so far, definitely descriptive of you. Yeah, a delusional perch, a self appointed place above everyone else. I can?t wait to see the finished product.


My statement was not made to be the authoritative description of a belief, so much as an observation of what many of your modern predecessors believe. You don?t see love in my heart because I have presented you with none. I don?t waste my love on undeserving creatures. To love everyone without discrimination is an insult to those that actually deserve it, and in fact degrades the very meaning of love itself.


This is, by far, one of the most humorous statements you made lately. But honestly, I do see your point. Christianity has made great progress, and has certainly helped society as a whole to flourish in a blissful happiness. I mean, where would we be without the Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, the crusades and the genocidal ?colonization? of North America just to name a few?


I don?t like you because you oppose my ideology? That?s laughable, that your small insurrections would drive me to despise you so much. You should really stop flattering yourself. A lot of atheists do tend to come off as quite pompous, actually. I know you see this though, you just won?t ?come out and so say directly?... Oh, except in threads about Leftists, where your intents become all to obvious to onlookers. Poor Assamite, you?ve taken a lot of anger out on him lately about his liberal views it would seem.


That point wasn?t even directed at you personally. I know it?s difficult for you to believe that something someone says isn?t about you, but you really need to stop taking such offense to everything and begin actually reading the fine points of people?s statements.


I have investigated and still am. My curiosity is never fulfilled. I?m observing everyday and in fact am right now. My point still stands though. How do you believe in and follow something that you don?t even know the ?truth? about? I assume you don?t speak very many languages outside of English, and even if so one of them probably isn?t Aramaic. So, with that in mind you have only read translations of the Holy Bible, which are interpretations of mortal authors that have been censored and edited by church authorities throughout the centuries.


Really, why not? I said that I do not personally know anyone that is truly Christian. What I mean by that is that I have an acquaintance or two that go to church or say they?re Christian, but merely do so because that?s what they were raised to do. It?s not a matter of them actually believing in the religion as much as it is conditioning, something that is very much the foundation of any respectable cult. Simply because I am self isolated from your kind does not strip me of my right of judgment. That?s the problem with you guys, you always want to tell everyone what right they do and do not have, and that was the point of my argument from the beginning. Even if that was the case, I have another interesting quote from you here that was found in a thread about Michael Moore. You obviously had the wrong idea about what ideology his documentary ?Bowling for Columbine? presented. Do you remember what you said when it was suggested that you see it before making judgment? Here, let me remind you: ?That's like me asking you to listen to Rush Limbaugh and take him seriously. What would be the point? I know what Moore's agenda is, I don't need to see his stupid film, I saw him in action for four years, right along with Soros and all the others.? Oh yay, that?s right. Hmmm, interesting isn?t it?


Do you really believe that I?m showing myself here on these forums? I do this for entertainment; I have no personal involvement invested within these debates, as I obviously do not gain or loss anything from them. I only fully reveal myself to those worthy of true form. To be known is a weakness, one must remain an enigma.

Edit: I'm not quite sure why those quotes aren't working *shrugs*

(Edit by Phoenix:  Repaired quote tags.)

I like rice.

malchia:
To be 'known' is actually a strength, in my opinion. Putting up a fake front is safe and easy to do, and many people actually even do this without realizing it. I know it's fun to do at times, I actually have done it myself at boring parties -- it can liven up the place and it doesn't really do any harm (gives some people stuff to talk or even think about).
However, mistaking this for strength sounds more dangerous to me than actually exposing your true ideas and feelings about things. Besides, I don't consider anyone with that kind of attitude 'special' or 'an enigma' -- I reserve those terms for less frivolous things and personalities.

That said, it's fine to know I don't have to take you seriously, in case we ever end up in dispute :]

Perhaps I put too much emphasis on that statement. My opinions within this realm are certainly not fabricated to simply mislead the general populace and make myself giggle. More so, what I meant and apparently put poorly was that I do not allow personal traits to be shown. In that regard, you should still take me seriously (as seriously as one can be taken on the internet). Not as if it matters since you and I have never had any unpleasant exchanges.

What have I started!? :wtf:

Don't flatter yourself.

I've read Mundane Anarchy.

So we're up for the "justified tit-for-tat" personal insults, are we?  What did we warn you about this before?  Oh right, you're justified for insulting Woodsman directly because he used the phrase "dumb ass" to describe your "characters".  Sorry, that's not going to fly.

You should have PM'd one of the moderators.

Glad to make you have to strategize and go into full "careful response" mode. ;)

No, you consider Christianity itself a corruption and corrupting element along the way to what you consider an ideal society.  Don't try to veil your thoughts, they are transparent.

Because if you keep the principles and eliminate God, then you're happy.  Problem is, we believe the principles originate FROM God, which is kind of why the two are inseparable.  See, this is what you fail to grasp about faith.  It's not just about morals, it's an entire way of life that goes deeper.  You have to open yourself to God, THEN everything else falls into place.  The corruption is a result of people who play at religion instead of seeking righteousness and then doing their best to live it.

No I most certainly did not, I do not, like you, consider Christianity "tainting".  I said it was built with Christianity in full flower.  You're the one not giving credit where credit is due.  As for the Roman Empire, well, we all know what happened to that one.

I could go into a whole host of verses to explain why this statement is patently false, but I see no point in it.  Instead I'll say this:  You're fulfilling one prophecy about how scoffers would appear in the later times doubting Christ's return, and how people would turn away from the faith.  Tell me, how many religions actually predict their own decline?  Seems counter-productive if religion is just self-serving as you believe it to be.

That's where you fail.  I do not consider myself above everyone else.  I consider myself a fallen creature who is unworthy of the gifts and mercies he has been given.  Don't mistake confidence for pompousness, and don't mistake indignation with arrogance.  I can be arrogant if I choose to be, it's a failing I readily admit to.  Admitting one's faults is part of what being a Christian is about, as there is no forgiveness without a repentant heart.

Oh bullshit.  You've already dug youself into that hole, my memory isn't so bad that I've forgotten your rants about how Christianity is the root of all evil, has caused so much pain and suffering, etc.  You even included a snippet of that down later in your text, so don't try to backtrack now.

Quote

You don?t see love in my heart because I have presented you with none. I don?t waste my love on undeserving creatures. To love everyone without discrimination is an insult to those that actually deserve it, and in fact degrades the very meaning of love itself.

You don't even know what love is, and this very statement proves this fact.  I've tried to provide examples, but you just will not listen.  I would explain how it works if you wished, but the fact that you think love must be somehow "deserved" to be given is exactly why you'll never get it.  It's why you can't understand Christianity.  I'm afraid I can't do anything to open your eyes.  None of us deserve love, which is why love can only be given freely.  Before you can understand love, you need to understand mercy, and compassion, and forgiveness.  Love reaches down to pull people up, it does not sit there in cold judgement of what it perceives to be lesser beings.

Quote

I mean, where would we be without the Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, the crusades and the genocidal ?colonization? of North America just to name a few?

Right, and let's hang the white man for owning slaves at one point too.  Let's go all the way back in time and hold trials for dinosaurs because they repressed mammals for millions of years as well.  Seriously, the absurdity of your attitude is astounding.  The past is OVER WITH.  What's done is done, I don't pretend to hide the sins people have committed in the name of God.  Stop pretending the sins committed in the name of secularism are no worse.

Quote

I don?t like you because you oppose my ideology? That?s laughable, that your small insurrections would drive me to despise you so much. You should really stop flattering yourself.

Flattering myself enough that someone - either you or one of your friends - chooses to post under my name on your own forum, right down to hotlinking my signature and avatar pics?  It's not like I didn't get wind of that.  Who's flattering who now?
 

Quote

A lot of atheists do tend to come off as quite pompous, actually. I know you see this though, you just won?t ?come out and so say directly?... Oh, except in threads about Leftists, where your intents become all to obvious to onlookers. Poor Assamite, you?ve taken a lot of anger out on him lately about his liberal views it would seem.

I have nothing against Assamite personally.  We get along quite well in the chat room when he's been in there, and when we've played games together.  Do I think he follows a very twisted and biased political philosophy?  Yes.  Do I think that sometimes results in a misplaced sympathy for "ignorant" conservatives that can be construed as a bit arrogant and insulting?  Of course.  I'm sure he thinks the same about me.  Still, we can disagree in politics and get along elsewhere.  As for Leftists being pompous - perhaps I should have been more clear that the leadership of the Left is where this originates from, not necessarily Assamite personally.  Not all of my "anger" is addressed to him personally.  If I hated his guts I'd just say so.  I don't.  I have no reason to.

Quote

(Phoenix)I have gay friends. I love them as much as I love my straight friends. Sexual orientation is irrelevent to me.

That point wasn?t even directed at you personally. I know it?s difficult for you to believe that something someone says isn?t about you, but you really need to stop taking such offense to everything and begin actually reading the fine points of people?s statements.

I was merely providing an example to counter your blanket statement.  Glad it went over your head, but then you never take anecdotal evidence seriously anyway.

Quote

I have investigated and still am. My curiosity is never fulfilled. I?m observing everyday and in fact am right now. My point still stands though. How do you believe in and follow something that you don?t even know the ?truth? about? I assume you don?t speak very many languages outside of English, and even if so one of them probably isn?t Aramaic. So, with that in mind you have only read translations of the Holy Bible, which are interpretations of mortal authors that have been censored and edited by church authorities throughout the centuries.

How can science believe in an event that supposedly happened 17 billion years ago from some minor background microwave radiation in space?  Yet science says that's enough to try to describe how the universe looked back then.  If that's the case why should a translation from one language to another be so much of a stumbling block?  Sounds more like an excuse to dismiss if you ask me.  And what is this "truth" we're somehow missing?  Oh, that's right, it's that the bible is nothing but an edited fabrication.  Can YOU read and speak Aramaic?  Or Hebrew?  Or Greek?  Have you studied the actual scrolls themselves?  Then how can you say what's written WASN'T translated properly?  Either way, translation of one text to another may lose some details, and regardless of editing and skewing by human hand, I trust that God knew in advance and anticipated such interference from fallible man.  It's something called "having faith".  Besides, if I want to know something from the literal Hebrew or Greek or Aramaic directly I know where to look.

Quote

(Phoenix)Then you have no right to sit in judgement of us.

Really, why not? I said that I do not personally know anyone that is truly Christian.

Who appointed you to decide who is or is not "truly" Christian?

Quote

What I mean by that is that I have an acquaintance or two that go to church or say they?re Christian, but merely do so because that?s what they were raised to do. It?s not a matter of them actually believing in the religion as much as it is conditioning, something that is very much the foundation of any respectable cult.

Right, pick the poorest example you can think of to form a basis for your opinion.  Real thorough investigation there.  Sounds more like condemnation through convenience to me.

Quote

Simply because I am self isolated from your kind does not strip me of my right of judgment. That?s the problem with you guys, you always want to tell everyone what right they do and do not have, and that was the point of my argument from the beginning.

If we followed that logic we Christians would have the right to judge you as a heathen unbeliever and torture you, then burn you at the stake if you did not repent, since the torment in hell would certainly be far worse than any torment on earth.  After all, you can't tell us what we have the right to do!  You want to talk about the Dark Ages?  I know all about that sort of attitude, and THIS is why Christ warned "Judge not, lest ye be judged, for as thou judgeth so shalt thou also be judged.  We don't do that sort of thing anymore since we all are allowed to actually read the bible, thanks to Gutenburg and Luther, and know what Christ actually said as opposed to having corrupt men using the church to withold God's truth from us believers.  All those misguided good intentions are known for what they were, and were done away with.  That's all you can see of us though, which is a pity.

Rights DO have limitations.  Your rights end where mine begin, and vice-versa.  Where you make the mistake is forgetting that our rights matter just as much as yours.  Like it or not, there are things you cannot do because there are consequences for them.  Attitudes like yours is why there are laws protecting free excercise of religion.  You would trample on other people's rights, considering your own to be more important, in order to have things your way.  Yet you'll be the first to accuse us of trying to do the very same thing.  I take a low opinion of people who clamor for their rights constantly.  "Me, me, me."  All you care about is what you want.  For we Christians it's "Self last, others first."  That's how we survived the constant persecution under the first 300 years of Roman rule - by example, not be edict.

Quote

?That's like me asking you to listen to Rush Limbaugh and take him seriously. What would be the point? I know what Moore's agenda is, I don't need to see his stupid film, I saw him in action for four years, right along with Soros and all the others.? Oh yay, that?s right. Hmmm, interesting isn?t it?

Please don't be so dense.  My statement was about Assamite's anti-conservative bias vs my conservative bias, and how asking either one of us to take the other's "poster-child" seriously was a laughable notion.  That's like me asking you to take the Bible seriously.  The difference is that I have Moore on record and his actions are observable, so I don't need watch his film to see what he's trying to pull.  This is why Moore is open to public scrutiny, the same as pundits like Limbaugh and Hannity are.  Anyone trying to affect public policy deserves close scrutiny and heavy skepticism, which leads me to my next point.

Quote

(Phoenix)Con: I wanted to get this out into the open once and for all, which is why I didn't moderate this. The best way to show someone for what they are is to let them shoot their mouth off and make an example out of themselves.

Do you really believe that I?m showing myself here on these forums? I do this for entertainment; I have no personal involvement invested within these debates, as I obviously do not gain or loss anything from them. I only fully reveal myself to those worthy of true form. To be known is a weakness, one must remain an enigma.

In otherwords, you are guilty of cowardice.  You're afraid that people will stand in judgement over you, and condemn you so you shroud yourself in mystery.  You're afraid of just being who you are.  That's the difference between us.  You may think I hide behind a mask of an online persona, but this *IS* who I am.  I make no apoligies for what I believe, nor do I try to conceal it.  It is veiled intents and deceit that are dangerous, as people who won't be frank and honest do so because of fear that their true selves, or true agendas, will undo them if found out.  If that's all this is to you, just a lot of smoke and mirrors, then you've done more to tell us who and what you are than any amount of words ever could.  If all you can do is troll from the shadows, then you'll remain a troll and nothing else.  Look at the world around you.  Very little ever grows in darkness, and what does is seldom ever good.  Think about that.

actually I wouldnt say hes a coward , + he has some very good arguments on your posts pho .

about the bible being printed first , so what , if it wasnt the bible it would have been another book .


about jesus his sacrifice
nobody really knows he did it out of free will .
some guy wrote that in the bible 50 or 80 years after the fact .
it could also be that they just took him and exacuted him because he meaned trouble .

my apologies, what i read, i'd interpreted as a gross grouping of all Christians under a single convenient heading - i hate that sort of stereotyping, and therefore bitched about it.

If you'll look on the periodic table, around 121, you'll find "Jonesium", named after the matter discovered upon examination of my skull.  However, just because I have a hard head does not mean I'm dense.  When someone launches an attack, it becomes very difficult to discern serious intent from sarcasm, especially when the sarcastic comment takes the same bent as the rest of the post.

Ahh, here it is.
Sar?casm (n): See: lord_malchia
Wow!  It's all clear to me now!


Sorry, but you obviously haven't been around long enough to know Phoenix very well.  If he is indeed a "delusional 14 year old", he's the most mature and wise 14 year old i've ever met.  Sometimes a bit strongly-opined, but I think we all are, some moreso than others.  At any rate, he's shared enough wisdom with me and helped me with enough situations that I'm at least willing to respect his wishes and treat him as he seeks to be treated, i.e. as a bird.  And hell, I haven't seen him with my own two eyes, so there's nothing saying he isn't a bird - not likely, perhaps, but in my short time on this planet I've seen more incredulous things, so I wouldn't be terribly surprised to meet him and find myself face to face with a giant bird.


See, the trick is, prior to the research I'd done on a technical level, I looked back at some of your postings, and of the ones I skimmed, many were actually fairly constructive - at least not destructive... so I gave you the benefit of the doubt until I completed my technical research.



I think we've all wasted enough time with this discussion, so please let's get this topic back on track.  Due to multiple violations of the CC rules by someone who'd previously been banned, I hereby pronounce this issue "resolved".  Con/Pho, if you think my resolution was a bit too harsh, let me know, or feel free to fix it yourself :)

Pomegranates are cool. They're round.

games:  Anyone can argue on the internet, this is a question of honesty and integrity of character, or lack thereof.  Besides, I never said he was a coward, I said he was guilty of cowardice in regards to his online persona and presentation of his arguments.  Even the bravest warrior can do cowardly things from time to time.  I don't know him in person, but then, that's no fault on my part.  I've given him ample chances to come forth, as you've seen here, and say what he thinks, but he's become nothing but a broken record and a forum troll.

As for your Jesus comments, who knows?  We could all be dead wrong about the guy, but the fact that the apostles kept believing, not renouncing even unto torture and death when they were alive and with the guy and saw whether or not he was in the tomb tends to give a strong degree of plausibility toward their witness being accurate.  People die for things they believe in, sure, but people do NOT go and die for something they know to be a sham, and not with a 100% martyr rate for those who had to face it.  The apostles knew one way or the other if Jesus was alive or dead when the stone was rolled away, the stone that had the seal of Caeser that could not be opened by any man under pain of death.  As for the historical account of events, and whether the text is made up or not, well that's up to the individual to choose whether or not to believe it.  We all have that freedom.  I only squawk when people try to take that freedom away, and I go to war with people that disguise it as being some kind of liberty to do so.

Dr. Jones:  It's no down off my back.  There's nothing constructive that's ever going to come out of further discussion of this.

As an addendum, I've split this off the original thread it was on.  Please people, let this be an example of what NOT to do in a thread.  That is, drive it blatantly off-topic and turn it into a rant-fest.  If you want to start a thread specifically to be a rant-fest, say that from the start, but don't co-opt a thread in order to:

1)  Bash a religion/sexual orientation/ethnicity, etc.  (Political parties, music groups, Counter-Strike, etc, are fair game)  "Bashing" is defined as unwarranted and ignorant hatred, lies, etc.  Criticism is one thing, flaming all PoinkaDoinks (I made that up) just because you don't like their beliefs is bigotry.  Use your brain and be respectful, mmkay?

2)  Launch personal attacks and post flame-bait hoping the party you dislike will start breaking forum rules in an attempt to justify your own return-fire insults. We don't like personal insults, nor do we like it when someone goads someone else with cleverly crafted rhetoric.   "He started it" WILL NOT FLY.  We're not stupid, and if we think you're flame-baiting someone you're the one we're going to deal with more harshly.

3)  Troll.  You want to know what trolling is?  Read this thread all the way through.  Trolling is deliberately posting inflamatory comments designed to start just this kind of back-and-forth ranting.  Trolling typically involves blatant ignorance, arrogance, and a high degree of baseless hostility.  Normally I lock threads or warn people about ripping them off the topic before it even gets near this point, but because of the behavior of this individual I chose instead to make an example of him since he's done it every freaking time he's been here.

A word to all would-be trolls:  find a bridge somewhere.  I don't care how smart you think you are, or how smart you actually may be.  If you can't show respect toward our other forum members then get lost.