After death
Moderator: Dictators in Training
Ugzugz wrote:Mindia... you silly, clueless, little man....
Since you can't answer the question I'll assume you're making it up. I even asked one of my catholic friends today if his church teaches that Mary Magdelene was married to Jesus. He laughed and said, "No, where did you hear that?" I then asked a Mormon woman who works in the cubicle next to me if she's ever heard of that. She also said no. I know that the Lutherans don't believe that. I know that the SDA church doesn't believe that. I know that every non-denominational Christian church I've been to doesn't believe that.
So what's your source of information Ugzugz? The Roman Catholic Church?
LMAO
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
Arlos wrote:Mindia, my last post had *NOTHING* to do with the Bible arguments. Though, I do find it amusing that you're calling Wikipidia biased, since that's where I got most of my information. You really think that Wikipidia is part of some grand Catholic Underground network? Anyway, that's neither here nor there. My last post, which you obviously failed to read, has to do with YOU making unfounded accusations and ad hominem attacks against my, and other people's characters.
Now, some more facts, since apparently I have to repeat them:
1) You called ME a liar. You have yet to demonstrate, anywhere, in any way, where I personally lied, in any form. You have thus accused me of being dishonest, which I flatly reject, and take great offense to. Since you have no proof of this allegation, it's obvious you ARE making a false accusation, ie, BEARING FALSE WITNESS, or, as your quote puts it, you attempted to "darken another man's name".
2) You called Gypsiee a slut. Last I checked, she's happily married, and yes, sleeps with her husband. Explain to me how a married woman sleeping with her husband equates to being a slut? Isn't that the absolute OPPOSITE of being a slut? Thus, again, you have BOURN FALSE WITNESS against her.
Now, whether or not you have any issue with violated that particular commandment is on your own conscience.
Now, in neither case have you apologized, despite multiple calls on my part for you to do so. In BOTH cases, you have violated the rules YOU FUCKING AGREED TO when you were unbanned. I expect either a full apology and retraction, with an admission you were wrong and out of line, or I work full time on getting you banned again, which shouldn't be hard, since your breaking of the conditions set forth to you for unbanning are clear as day for all to see.
Which is it going to be, Mindia?
-Arlos
Stop whining you whimp. I called you a liar because of your outlandish claims and obvious lack of Biblical knowledge and Biblical history. Because you yourself were lied to by your stupid clueless former church, I will give you the leeway that you don't know what you're talking about, and that you're only spewing forth propaganda that was drilled into your pea-brained head, so you don't know any better.
Well, now that you know the truth about the books of the Apocrypha having never been in the original Bible, and that they were added by the catholic church, I'll let you off the hook this time because you didn't know.
Now, on to your second claim...
When did I call Gypsiyee a slut? How long ago was it, and what were the circumstances? Did she say something to offend me and what I said was a knee-jerk reaction? Tell the whole story next time, chump... not bits & pieces in an attempt to validate your weak and untruthful claims.
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
Ugzugz wrote:So Mindia - only Christians are allowed an opinion on the historical figure who was Jesus of Nazareth? No one else has anything worthwhile to say about it? Regarded historians and archaeologists... their opinions don't mean anything, right?
I didn't say that. One must, however, consider the source when listening to a "historian." They can be extremely biased. I am very careful to analyze if what is being "taught" is fact, or opinion. There are a lot more historians and theologians who will agree that the books of the Apocrypha were not part of the original Bible, than will defend the idea that they were a part of the original Bible.
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
Who are you to say "who's biased"? Don't you come laden with your own biases based on your beliefs?
Which is more concrete (not which do you believe more... we know that already), history as based upon researched facts and archaeological finds... or faith in the god of your Bible?
I would encourage you to look up the definition of "concrete" before you answer.
Which is more concrete (not which do you believe more... we know that already), history as based upon researched facts and archaeological finds... or faith in the god of your Bible?
I would encourage you to look up the definition of "concrete" before you answer.
Mindia wrote:I was wrong obviously.
OK, you had your chance to apologize to me and Gypsiee, you elected to further insult me. Well, I warned you. Here's to hoping your ban is soon. Formal complaints filed with board management.
And you'll let ME off the hook? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. That is hysterical. You've yet to offer ONE shred of evidence to back up your claims, or one single iota of explanation as to why the world's OLDEST bibles, transcribed from scrolls likely dating back to the 1st or 2nd century, DO have the apocryphal books (with the acception of Machabees, as I said). You keep claiming I'm brainwashed by Catholicism or some such, yet keep ignoring the fact I haven't been a Catholic in almost 20 years, nor did I ever have any discussions with anyone in the church about what books are and aren't in there and why.
In any case, I sincerely hope this is our last discussion, and that you're out on your ass soon. You won't be missed, not by anyone.
-Arlos
And you'll let ME off the hook? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. That is hysterical. You've yet to offer ONE shred of evidence to back up your claims, or one single iota of explanation as to why the world's OLDEST bibles, transcribed from scrolls likely dating back to the 1st or 2nd century, DO have the apocryphal books (with the acception of Machabees, as I said). You keep claiming I'm brainwashed by Catholicism or some such, yet keep ignoring the fact I haven't been a Catholic in almost 20 years, nor did I ever have any discussions with anyone in the church about what books are and aren't in there and why.
In any case, I sincerely hope this is our last discussion, and that you're out on your ass soon. You won't be missed, not by anyone.
-Arlos
Mindia!!!! Too bad he is back...
umm mindia, jesus was a jew and not a christian (go figure) and while it wasnt specifically illegal to be unmarried under jewish law at the time of his life it was certainly unusual enough for a 30+ year old man who was called "rabbi" to be single that one of the disciples in the gospels would of mentioned it and explained it. next you will be telling me that Paul was single even though he was a member of the sanhedron (requires marriage).
the wedding where Jesus turns water into wine is often viewed by many theologians as being Jesus' own wedding to non other then mary magdeline.
oh another interesting tidbit... mary magdeline is NEVER once called a whore any where in the new testement. its a title given to her by the catholic church to stifle the "jesus was married" beleif so that the rcc could make marriage illegal in the priesthood
now before you go flying into a fit ask yourself a few questions
is marriage a sin?
is sex a sin?
didnt god order adam and eve to fuck like bunnies?
if jesus existed to show us how to live a perfect life woudlnt he be married in order to show us the perfect family?
the wedding where Jesus turns water into wine is often viewed by many theologians as being Jesus' own wedding to non other then mary magdeline.
oh another interesting tidbit... mary magdeline is NEVER once called a whore any where in the new testement. its a title given to her by the catholic church to stifle the "jesus was married" beleif so that the rcc could make marriage illegal in the priesthood
now before you go flying into a fit ask yourself a few questions
is marriage a sin?
is sex a sin?
didnt god order adam and eve to fuck like bunnies?
if jesus existed to show us how to live a perfect life woudlnt he be married in order to show us the perfect family?
Arlos wrote:OK, you had your chance to apologize to me and Gypsiee, you elected to further insult me. Well, I warned you. Here's to hoping your ban is soon. Formal complaints filed with board management.
And you'll let ME off the hook? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. That is hysterical. You've yet to offer ONE shred of evidence to back up your claims, or one single iota of explanation as to why the world's OLDEST bibles, transcribed from scrolls likely dating back to the 1st or 2nd century, DO have the apocryphal books (with the acception of Machabees, as I said). You keep claiming I'm brainwashed by Catholicism or some such, yet keep ignoring the fact I haven't been a Catholic in almost 20 years, nor did I ever have any discussions with anyone in the church about what books are and aren't in there and why.
In any case, I sincerely hope this is our last discussion, and that you're out on your ass soon. You won't be missed, not by anyone.
-Arlos
Yeah, go on thinking that you were instrumental in having me banned.
BWAHAHAHAHA is right. Up yours. Do some studying about the Bible and the books of the Apocrypha from an un-catholic website. I too hope this is our last discussion, you moron. Shut the hell up and go away.
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
Mindia wrote:When did I call Gypsiyee a slut? How long ago was it, and what were the circumstances? Did she say something to offend me and what I said was a knee-jerk reaction? Tell the whole story next time, chump... not bits & pieces in an attempt to validate your weak and untruthful claims.
ok so personal insults don't count if they're kneejerk reactions?
get real
compost the rich