I found... this...

[Strider]

If on takes the bible literally then one can not cherry pick passages that support the wickedness in ones heart. One must reconcile the whole book, not just focus on a favorable passage, or that person can not have taken the whole book literally.

To label a cherry picker as someone who has accepted the whole bible is foolishness.

Someone who interprets certain passages in the Bible literally while ignoring others is just as bad as a person who reads the entire thing linterally. And I didn't label him as someone who accepted the whole bible as literal fact. I presented that example to demonstrate a situation where a person with political influence, supposedly working for his constituents, used an ancient, vile verse in its literal sense to imply homosexuals should be put to death.

[Spooky]

No one? That is a very naive statement, Drich. Crazy people can and do interpret the Bible literally. There is a state representative here in Mississippi that quoted scripture from Leviticus on his Facebook page in regards to homosexual marriage, stating "[t]he only opinion that counts is God's." Of course, he was quoting Leviticus 20:13, calling for the death of those committing homosexuality.

A group called Unity MS called for him to apologize, but he refused. Why? Because he will not apologize for "the inspired truth of God's Word". For him, God's inspired word says homosexuals should be killed. It apparently doesn't matter to him that Leviticus is OT law. Oh, and he's a Southern Baptist preacher so that further sweetens the pot.

So, yeah, biblical literalists exist and they would be dangerous if they had free rein to do as they pleased.

If on takes the bible literally then one can not cherry pick passages that support the wickedness in ones heart. One must reconcile the whole book, not just focus on a favorable passage, or that person can not have taken the whole book literally.

To label a cherry picker as someone who has accepted the whole bible is foolishness.

---

Have I even read the book? Are you serious? We are talking about the bible right?

I have read the book. Multiple times. And taught adults and children from it. And read other religious texts as well. Your statement doesn't make any sense. How could you not be dangerous even if using it as loose guidelines.

What the hell, are you serious?

If you've read the whole book, may I ask why how is it you do not seem to know what it contains?

It's like you're channeling dead crazy people, who are responding to a different conversation.

I am fully aware of your hate filled middle eastern fantasy novel's contents. And quite frankly Roger Zelazny does it better.
Is there a specific one I'm missing? I own NIV, KJV and NCV.

[Faith No More]

It's always interesting when new members find Drich.

[dyresand]

It's always interesting when new members find Drich.

They find Dirch then avoid finding jesus.

[Drich]

Ahhh. No. What we have here is you saying one christian did "x" but have yet to provide any evidence for it.
I have been asking from you is to provide some sort of proof to back you claim.

You didn't read the link, did you? LOL, fucking moron.

"Vigilantes of Christendom", a "priest in a war against anti-god people" - and of course the litany of christian terror groups that follows, all with their own rap sheets and verifiable histories.
.........The prosecution rests.

These are words of a bigotted and hard heart. Despite what the evidence shows you have you mind made up about a people and proceed to lump everyone together nothing will change it.

The evidence shows me that unhinged motherfuckers see what they want to see in the bible. You, him, others. hrugs:

There is nothing more to say if indeed you are biggoted and hard hearted.

promises, promises.........

How are you not a Poe or troll? Or rather how did a Poe/troll become a mod?

I did read the artical up till this point:

"While the impetus for McQuilliams’ onslaught remains unclear, local authorities recently announced that he may have been motivated by religion "

Which is where Any Intellectually honest person would stop. Why? Idk, maybe because according to the cops investigating, their was no impetus/motive, only speculation, which this troll/Poe artical spun into a witch hunt for douche bags like you and the op. That is why I've asked you repeatedly what christian command motivated these actions... Seeings how you just now quoted the article, it is far more likly you just read it... And rather poorly I might add.

---

If on takes the bible literally then one can not cherry pick passages that support the wickedness in ones heart. One must reconcile the whole book, not just focus on a favorable passage, or that person can not have taken the whole book literally.

To label a cherry picker as someone who has accepted the whole bible is foolishness.

Someone who interprets certain passages in the Bible literally while ignoring others is just as bad as a person who reads the entire thing linterally. And I didn't label him as someone who accepted the whole bible as literal fact. I presented that example to demonstrate a situation where a person with political influence, supposedly working for his constituents, used an ancient, vile verse in its literal sense to imply homosexuals should be put to death.

In that time under that law they were be put to death, but again a true literalist knows we are not in that time under that law.

---

It's always interesting when new members find Drich.

They find Dirch then avoid finding jesus.

What do you mean "they" you still don't know how to respond to my work and still get to retain your 'pride.'

---

If on takes the bible literally then one can not cherry pick passages that support the wickedness in ones heart. One must reconcile the whole book, not just focus on a favorable passage, or that person can not have taken the whole book literally.

To label a cherry picker as someone who has accepted the whole bible is foolishness.

---

If you've read the whole book, may I ask why how is it you do not seem to know what it contains?

It's like you're channeling dead crazy people, who are responding to a different conversation.

I am fully aware of your hate filled middle eastern fantasy novel's contents. And quite frankly Roger Zelazny does it better.
Is there a specific one I'm missing? I own NIV, KJV and NCV.

That's fine Spanky, just pick one and provide me with some book chapter and verse that allows or rather commands Christians to commit acts of terrorism.

Otherwise know your posturing is meaningless.

[dyresand]

You didn't read the link, did you? LOL, fucking moron.

"Vigilantes of Christendom", a "priest in a war against anti-god people" - and of course the litany of christian terror groups that follows, all with their own rap sheets and verifiable histories.
.........The prosecution rests.

The evidence shows me that unhinged motherfuckers see what they want to see in the bible. You, him, others. hrugs:

promises, promises.........

How are you not a Poe or troll? Or rather how did a Poe/troll become a mod?

I did read the artical up till this point:

"While the impetus for McQuilliams’ onslaught remains unclear, local authorities recently announced that he may have been motivated by religion "

Which is where Any Intellectually honest person would stop. Why? Idk, maybe because according to the cops investigating, their was no impetus/motive, only speculation, which this troll/Poe artical spun into a witch hunt for douche bags like you and the op. That is why I've asked you repeatedly what christian command motivated these actions... Seeings how you just now quoted the article, it is far more likly you just read it... And rather poorly I might add.

---

Someone who interprets certain passages in the Bible literally while ignoring others is just as bad as a person who reads the entire thing linterally. And I didn't label him as someone who accepted the whole bible as literal fact. I presented that example to demonstrate a situation where a person with political influence, supposedly working for his constituents, used an ancient, vile verse in its literal sense to imply homosexuals should be put to death.

In that time under that law they were be put to death, but again a true literalist knows we are not in that time under that law.

---

They find Dirch then avoid finding jesus.

What do you mean "they" you still don't know how to respond to my work and still get to retain your 'pride.'

---

It's like you're channeling dead crazy people, who are responding to a different conversation.

I am fully aware of your hate filled middle eastern fantasy novel's contents. And quite frankly Roger Zelazny does it better.
Is there a specific one I'm missing? I own NIV, KJV and NCV.

That's fine Spanky, just pick one and provide me with some book chapter and verse that allows or rather commands Christians to commit acts of terrorism.

Otherwise know your posturing is meaningless.

What pride Dirch? really what pride i am all ears?

[The Grand Nudger]

How are you not a Poe or troll? Or rather how did a Poe/troll become a mod?

I did read the artical up till this point:

"While the impetus for McQuilliams’ onslaught remains unclear, local authorities recently announced that he may have been motivated by religion "

Guess you should have kept going..because the article then goes on to list other prominent christian terror groups past and present.

Which is where Any Intellectually honest person would stop.

LOL, hold on..I want to get my shit together here, I'm being lectured about intellectual honesty by Mr. Monkey Man with a Soul™.


Why do they think that he may have been motivated by religion Drich? Quote the article, that you didn't actually read. Or...just quote me....then go back, read the rest of the article. Hell, you might be able to participate in a conversation that doesn't amount to yet another brick in the wall you've been building between yourself and reality.

[dyresand]

How are you not a Poe or troll? Or rather how did a Poe/troll become a mod?

I did read the artical up till this point:

"While the impetus for McQuilliams’ onslaught remains unclear, local authorities recently announced that he may have been motivated by religion "

Guess you should have kept going..because the article then goes on to list other prominent christian terror groups past and present.

Which is where Any Intellectually honest person would stop.

LOL, hold on..I want to get my shit together here, I'm being lectured about intellectual honesty by Mr. Monkey Man with a Soul™.


Why do they think that he may have been motivated by religion Drich? Quote the article, that you didn't actually read. Or...just quote me....then go back, read the rest of the article. Hell, you might be able to participate in a conversation that doesn't amount to yet another brick in the wall you've been building between yourself and reality.

Dirch the word forger and bender... I doubt anyone could have any good conversation with him without making anything up...but yeah he should have read the article instead of making things up on the spot.

[Drich]

How are you not a Poe or troll? Or rather how did a Poe/troll become a mod?

I did read the artical up till this point:

"While the impetus for McQuilliams’ onslaught remains unclear, local authorities recently announced that he may have been motivated by religion "

Guess you should have kept going..because the article then goes on to list other prominent christian terror groups past and present.

Which is where Any Intellectually honest person would stop.

LOL, hold on..I want to get my shit together here, I'm being lectured about intellectual honesty by Mr. Monkey Man with a Soul™.


Why do they think that he may have been motivated by religion Drich? Quote the article, that you didn't actually read. Or...just quote me....then go back, read the rest of the article. Hell, you might be able to participate in a conversation that doesn't amount to yet another brick in the wall you've been building between yourself and reality.

Your serious aren't you?
You mean to say that you really don't know any better?

I've already proven that the author of that artical takes liberties when he labeled the actions of this man as being an act of christian terrorism when infact the investigators only said their May have been a religious component. That means if you seriously want to use any of this hack's work as legitmate source material for your own arguement, you must then find a solid verfiable secondary source to back up his discredited claim.

Everything he said beyond the stated verfiable facts then becomes intelectual garbage. You take his garbage in you have no option but to spew his garbage back out. This garbage I have already dismissed.

Try again rhythm.

[The Grand Nudger]

Still haven't read the article, huh? Dude, it's not gonna bite you. You're going to -have- to read the article to claim that you've proven anything...with regards to the article, eh?