I found... this...

[Drich]

You don't get to dictate the things that others draw from their religious experience. Boo-hoo.

I have not decided anything. I simply asked where is the Christian mandate to justify acts of terrorism. If not Christian manidates can be found as with the quran or even for OT Judaism then one can conclude they did not act on the behalf of Christianity. What you don't seem to get is you don't get to decide what one can believe about Christianity. There are rules and conditions that set a christian apart from any other religion.
One could not act and follow the rules of Islam and still rightfully claim he is apart of Christianity No more than one could build his own religion and call it Christianity.

So again it all goes back to finding book chapter and verse to cover the acts of terrorism. If one can in the NT, then one can consider what was done a Christian act. If not, then special plead all you want and it changes nothing.

(Which BTW is what your whole arguement is. Special pleading)

I don't need to provide shit from your fairy tales, and I have no desire to wade through them. Said terrorists found what you require, maybe you should go attend one of their pow-wows?

So you are basing your whole special pleading arguement on the assumption that the terrorist found a NT passage that supports their actions? What if the terrorist thought they received a direct revelation from an angel or something along those lines? What if they like your buddies in the following posts, don't understand the difference between OT Judaism and NT Christianity?

wow, with amount of research logic that you have put into your rebuttal I can see why you are so certain their is no God.

In truth if you want this discussion to continue down the road your traveling then show me where they used the Christian bible to justify their deeds. otherwise your is not only special pleading, it is also a argument from ignorance.

---

Again, if the religion does not support terrorism, how can they be considered terrorists. You like the op have failed to answer this question.

As per my PETA example just because one considers himself a member of a group does not make him a member. One must follow the rules of said group to be a member. Otherwise actual members can say this person is just claiming to be a member and his actions do not reflect any principles of said group.

Unless You like the op can provide something in the Christian bible that supports these actions you are both guilty of over zealous persecutory thinking.

They should be killed.
"If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you ... Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die."

Deuteronomy 13:6-10

You do understand that the "Holy Bible" repersents 2 different and seperate religions do you not?

If no, then understand the passage you quoted was a command given to the OT Jews. Even modern day Judaism do not follow all of these laws.

Their is a break in the bible that seperates Christianity from OT Judaism. These are known as the Old and New testaments. Everything in the OT or Old Testament relates to OT Judaism, and may not apply to NT (New Testament) Christianity. If Christians were to be OT Jews, we would not have seperated the bible nor ourselves from the OT system of belief.

So what else you got?

[The Grand Nudger]

We have here one christian bitching about other christians getting it wrong- take a number. Regardless of what either of you points to as your scriptural basis I'm going to laugh in both of your faces, don't you understand that? So you don't like your tent-mates....understandable, they're pieces of shit. And?

Your bible doesn't mean anything to me, it doesn't make the case for -either- of you. You both see precisely what you wish to see.
(and you really need to l2logic.....special pleading ffs....it's not even applicable in our discussion - pick some other phrase you've learned to ape in your time here: or...for bonus points, rather than saying "special pleading" lay out -how and why it's "special pleading"....and then I'll tell you what fallacy you were actually grasping for?)

[Spooky]

You don't get to dictate the things that others draw from their religious experience. Boo-hoo.

I have not decided anything. I simply asked where is the Christian mandate to justify acts of terrorism. If not Christian manidates can be found as with the quran or even for OT Judaism then one can conclude they did not act on the behalf of Christianity. What you don't seem to get is you don't get to decide what one can believe about Christianity. There are rules and conditions that set a christian apart from any other religion.
One could not act and follow the rules of Islam and still rightfully claim he is apart of Christianity No more than one could build his own religion and call it Christianity.

So again it all goes back to finding book chapter and verse to cover the acts of terrorism. If one can in the NT, then one can consider what was done a Christian act. If not, then special plead all you want and it changes nothing.

(Which BTW is what your whole arguement is. Special pleading)

I don't need to provide shit from your fairy tales, and I have no desire to wade through them. Said terrorists found what you require, maybe you should go attend one of their pow-wows?

So you are basing your whole special pleading arguement on the assumption that the terrorist found a NT passage that supports their actions? What if the terrorist thought they received a direct revelation from an angel or something along those lines? What if they like your buddies in the following posts, don't understand the difference between OT Judaism and NT Christianity?

wow, with amount of research logic that you have put into your rebuttal I can see why you are so certain their is no God.

In truth if you want this discussion to continue down the road your traveling then show me where they used the Christian bible to justify their deeds. otherwise your is not only special pleading, it is also a argument from ignorance.

---

They should be killed.
"If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you ... Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die."

Deuteronomy 13:6-10

You do understand that the "Holy Bible" repersents 2 different and seperate religions do you not?

If no, then understand the passage you quoted was a command given to the OT Jews. Even modern day Judaism do not follow all of these laws.

Their is a break in the bible that seperates Christianity from OT Judaism. These are known as the Old and New testaments. Everything in the OT or Old Testament relates to OT Judaism, and may not apply to NT (New Testament) Christianity. If Christians were to be OT Jews, we would not have seperated the bible nor ourselves from the OT system of belief.

So what else you got?

Do you understand that dangerous idiots take that book literally?

[dyresand]

Do you understand that dangerous idiots take that book literally?

He doesn't understand that or ever will or even wan't to...
Now i will read my book on logic and reason to become a radically sane person.

[Drich]

We have here one christian bitching about other christians getting it wrong- take a number.

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.

Regardless of what either of you points to as your scriptural basis I'm going to laugh in both of your faces, don't you understand that? So you don't like your tent-mates....understandable, they're pieces of shit. And

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.

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

---

Do you understand that dangerous idiots take that book literally?

Have you even read the book? If you did you would know without doubt no one could take the bible literally and be dangerous.

---

Do you understand that dangerous idiots take that book literally?

He doesn't understand that or ever will or even wan't to...
Now i will read my book on logic and reason to become a radically sane person.

word salad much?

[Spooky]

We have here one christian bitching about other christians getting it wrong- take a number.

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.

Regardless of what either of you points to as your scriptural basis I'm going to laugh in both of your faces, don't you understand that? So you don't like your tent-mates....understandable, they're pieces of shit. And

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.

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

---

Do you understand that dangerous idiots take that book literally?

Have you even read the book? If you did you would know without doubt no one could take the bible literally and be dangerous.

---

He doesn't understand that or ever will or even wan't to...
Now i will read my book on logic and reason to become a radically sane person.

word salad much?

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?

[Strider]

Have you even read the book? If you did you would know without doubt no one could take the bible literally and be dangerous.

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.

[dyresand]

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.

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.

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

---

Have you even read the book? If you did you would know without doubt no one could take the bible literally and be dangerous.

---

word salad much?

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 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?

Dirch is as serious as a heart attack.

[Drich]

Have you even read the book? If you did you would know without doubt no one could take the bible literally and be dangerous.

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.

---

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.

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.

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

---

Have you even read the book? If you did you would know without doubt no one could take the bible literally and be dangerous.

---

word salad much?

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?

[The Grand Nudger]

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.........