namelesstavern.net

Yamori wrote:Whats wrong with having multiple wives and husbands? I'm curious.

It's like buttpie. People don't like it.

I'm personally not fond of the multiple husband/wife thing because I believe that that type of love is meant for only one person - if you add more partners it takes away from what makes your relationship special, which is being with the one person who can connect with you like no one else can

If you want a bunch of partners, don't marry.. stay dating. If you can't settle down, don't half-ass settle down - relationships take a lot of work, if you're donating that work to multiple people, you're not giving your all to any entire relationship

Not to mention the sexual problems that could occur, of course.

Yeah, I don't think it's a smart move personally, but I still think it's a valid choice for those willing to do it. What I'm asking is, why is it lumped in the same place as incest, which has obvious genetic consequences.

Oh, please, Lyion. Bisexuality has *NOTHING* to do whatsoever with incest or anything else. That is absolutely absurd and laughable, and easily one of the stupidest things you have EVER said on here. That's a Mindia-esque comment, and I'm truly surprised hearing it from you.

As for Mindia, everyone knows he's the single most closed-minded, fanatical zealot on the entire board. The only one who doesn't seem to be aware of it is him.

-Arlos

Arlos wrote:Oh, please, Lyion. Bisexuality has *NOTHING* to do whatsoever with incest or anything else. That is absolutely absurd and laughable, and easily one of the stupidest things you have EVER said on here. That's a Mindia-esque comment, and I'm truly surprised hearing it from you.

As for Mindia, everyone knows he's the single most closed-minded, fanatical zealot on the entire board. The only one who doesn't seem to be aware of it is him.

-Arlos

Holy crap! I've been Arlos'd!

Haha Arlos just admitted being a closeted bisexual hahahaha what a faggortz!!!!!!11

Araby said:

It's like buttpie. People don't like it.

Um... Eeew.

He doesn't like the buttpie.

Just look at those blazing eyes! ANGRY!!

Those are eyes of love

I hate when I cant make my thoughts more clear.

I dont think of major religions as cults. Except Mormans. I meant some other cult, like...some other religion. Sorry if that wasnt as clear as I could have made it.

It might be because it is late, but I dont understand your post, Lyion. Because I think that women are beautiful, I will be with my daughter? That's QUITE a stretch of what I said. I have morals, same as you and Joe Schmoe. I know where the lines are drawn. You like women. So do I. Does this mean you will get with your sister or daughter? I just dont get what you are trying to say...

Buttpie lol

I think Catholics are a bigger cult than the Mormons are.

Well we differ on that then.

a)look up cult
b)get out of my thread

d)why do you people encourage him so? everyone aknowledges he's a complete idiot except for himself (maybe fin), he will never get it.

he is just scared sense his god of wrath said everyone should love their neighbor as they love themselves, and he can't manage to follow it.

Mindia wrote:

Arlos wrote:Oh, please, Lyion. Bisexuality has *NOTHING* to do whatsoever with incest or anything else. That is absolutely absurd and laughable, and easily one of the stupidest things you have EVER said on here. That's a Mindia-esque comment, and I'm truly surprised hearing it from you.

As for Mindia, everyone knows he's the single most closed-minded, fanatical zealot on the entire board. The only one who doesn't seem to be aware of it is him.

-Arlos

Holy crap! I've been Arlos'd!

Haha Arlos just admitted being a closeted bisexual hahahaha what a faggortz!!!!!!11

Dude, aren't you like 40?

I had more mature male friends when I was in 6th grade.. sheesh

Gypsiyee wrote:

Mindia wrote:

Arlos wrote:Oh, please, Lyion. Bisexuality has *NOTHING* to do whatsoever with incest or anything else. That is absolutely absurd and laughable, and easily one of the stupidest things you have EVER said on here. That's a Mindia-esque comment, and I'm truly surprised hearing it from you.

As for Mindia, everyone knows he's the single most closed-minded, fanatical zealot on the entire board. The only one who doesn't seem to be aware of it is him.

-Arlos

Holy crap! I've been Arlos'd!

Haha Arlos just admitted being a closeted bisexual hahahaha what a faggortz!!!!!!11

Dude, aren't you like 40?

I had more mature male friends when I was in 6th grade.. sheesh

OMG please

lyion wrote:

Darcler wrote:Dont question my morals. I know where I am going, and I can assure you, it isnt heading to incest or anything. Homosexuality isnt a "gateway drug". It doesnt lead to other things. I find women very beautiful and I sometimes act on it.

I'm repeating what you have said. You said you do not accept things and have no baseline for cultural standards. Who's to say you wont find a relative or your daughter beautiful and act on it when she's old enough? After all, what others think and social mores do not matter to you, according to your post. All that matters is your own personal view, and not others.

She never said that. She said she didn't think Christians have 100% right or any other group had is 100% right. No one knows everything; I think the same goes for groups. No single group knows everything. Anyone who is arrogant enough to think they know everything and know exactly what everything is about is obviously very ignorant.

lyion wrote:

Darcler wrote:We've already discussed how we are going to keep Hailey in the church. I found the youth program to be helpful to my social and emotional needs. But, if she were to turn away as I did, I would not get on her case. I will support anything she wants to do, be it Buddism, Catholicism, Christianity or some other cult.

So, you think she should find her own path spiritually. That's an interesting thing since it appears you are far from finding your own, and have pent up anger or misunderstanding of religion as a whole.

I'm curious if your daughter ends up Christian if you'll still call it a cult, and still have hostility towards it.

Why does it matter if she has not chosen a spiritual path? Are you not a good or real person if you don’t follow some arbitrary spiritual path?

Also, neither of us are hostile towards different religions. The truth is the Christian church is hostile toward us. Why? Because we keep an open mind and understand they may actually be wrong. We were told believe as they believe or leave.

She also didn't call Christianity a cult (the negative meaning of the word), it was just a bad choice of words on her part at the time. However if you want to get into it, all religions are cults. Now if our daughter decides to follow the Christian church, that’s fine. We will not get in her way or look down on her because of it. It’s all personal beliefs and by no means will we force our beliefs on our children. I wish other parents would do the same and not force their beliefs on their children and especially not other people’s children.

Tuggan wrote:because mindia is a tolerant christian with his arms open and welcome to all... just so long as they believe in the lord and savior jesus christ. duh.

Except for Catholics. They're all dupes of Satan.

For a Seventh Day Adventist to call another sect a 'cult' is just pure irony.

--R.

Rust wrote:

Tuggan wrote:because mindia is a tolerant christian with his arms open and welcome to all... just so long as they believe in the lord and savior jesus christ. duh.

Except for Catholics. They're all dupes of Satan.

For a Seventh Day Adventist to call another sect a 'cult' is just pure irony.

--R.

Would you care to explain this to us Rust? I sure as hell hope you're not talking about David Korresh, since he was only an Adventist very briefly way before he started his own cult called the "Branch Davidians" which weren't even remotely associated with Adventists. Also, Adventists don't kneel down and pray in front of statues (idolatry and Mariology), or confess through another man sitting in a "confessional," or pray through prayer beads, or spread word of a false "purgatory."

Adventists are strictly Bible-based, and as such, hold in high regard both the Old and New Testaments. They are much less "cultish" in practice than ANY other Christian sect.

You already got owned a few weeks ago in this subject. I find it quite bizarre that you're coming back for more punishment and embarrassment. To each his own I guess...

Say hi to Ellen G White for me.

I would except she's dead. And I already stated numerous times... I don't revere EGW as a prophet, and neither do several Adventists I know. My pastor doesn't even mention her. Bringing up EGW as a case against Adventists is very to us.

Cool, Mindia's not only in a cult, he's a heretic against SDA doctrine about EGW.

--R.

Rust wrote:Cool, Mindia's not only in a cult, he's a heretic against SDA doctrine about EGW.

--R.

/YAWN

I'm amazed that somebody with so much alleged education can consistently sound so stupid.

Except he's stating SDA doctrine. Let's go over the foundation of the SDA.

Adventist History

The Seventh-Day Adventist church traces its roots to American preacher William Miller (1782–1849), a Baptist who predicted the Second Coming would occur between March 21, 1843, and March 21, 1844. Because he and his followers proclaimed Christ’s imminent advent, they were known as "Adventists."

When Christ failed to appear, Miller reluctantly endorsed the position of a group of his followers known as the "seventh-month movement," who claimed Christ would return on October 22, 1844 (in the seventh month of the Jewish calendar).

When this didn’t happen either, Miller forswore predicting the date of the Second Coming, and his followers broke up into a number of competing factions. Miller would have nothing to do with the new theories his followers produced, including ones which attempted to save part of his 1844 doctrine. He rejected this and other teachings being generated by his former followers, including those of Ellen Gould White.

Miller had claimed, based on his interpretation of Daniel and Revelation, that Christ would return in 1843–44 to cleanse "the sanctuary" (Dan. 8:11–14, 9:26), which he interpreted as the earth. After the disappointments of 1844, several of his followers proposed an alternative theory. While walking in a cornfield on the morning of October 23, 1844, the day after Christ failed to return, Hiram Edson felt he received a spiritual revelation that indicated that Miller had misidentified the sanctuary. It was not the earth, but the Holy of Holies in God’s heavenly temple. Instead of coming out of the heavenly temple to cleanse the sanctuary of the earth, in 1844 Christ, for the first time, went into the heavenly Holy of Holies to cleanse it instead.

Another group of Millerites was influenced by Joseph Bates, a retired sea captain, who in 1846 and 1849 issued pamphlets insisting that Christians observe the Jewish Sabbath—Saturday—instead of worshipping on Sunday. This helped feed the intense anti-Catholicism of Seventh-Day Adventism, since they blamed the Catholic Church for changing the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday.

These two streams of thought—Christ entering the heavenly sanctuary and the need to keep the Jewish Sabbath—were combined by White, who claimed to have received many visions confirming these doctrines. Together with Edson and Bates, she formed the Seventh-Day Adventist denomination, which officially received its name in 1860.

Adventist Propaganda

White claimed to receive the first of several hundred visions in December of 1844. She gained recognition in Adventist circles as a prophetess and became the church’s leader. Over the next few decades, she provided guidance on almost every aspect of belief and worship, writing over fifty books commenting on health, education, finance, and other topics. Her works are held by her followers to be inerrant on matters of doctrine, as is the Bible, though they are on a slightly lower plane of honor than the Bible.

Her most important books, especially The Desire of the Ages and The Great Controversy, are frequently reprinted by Seventh-Day Adventist publishing houses in a variety of formats. They often appear with different covers and titles. For example, The Great Controversy is often marketed as America in Prophecy. They are printed whole or in excerpted form. Sometimes Ellen Gould White’s name appears on the cover, sometimes a less well-known form of her name appears (e.g., E. G. White), and sometimes her name does not appear on the outside of the book at all.

This allows Adventists to put White’s works in the hands of non-Adventists without alerting them that they are reading an Adventist publication until they are well into the work.

Adventist publishing houses also keep the terms "Seventh-Day" and "Adventist" out of their names. Typical Adventist and Adventist-related publishing houses have names including Inspiration Books, Amazing Truth Publications, Review & Herald Publishing Association, and Pilgrims’ Press.

This is because Adventists have always been regarded suspiciously by Evangelicals and have often been viewed as a fanatical cult (as have some of their offshoots, such as the Branch Davidians). Many Evangelical leaders even have asserted—incorrectly—that Adventists are not Christians, even though they believe in Christ’s divinity and use a valid Trinitarian form of baptism.

Often Adventist-related publishing houses conduct mass mailings of their literature to every home and post office box in a community. This has been done regularly with Amazing Truth Publications’ anti-Catholic volume, National Sunday Law.

Adventist Eschatology

Seventh-Day Adventism is basically consumed with the concept of the last days. It was formed from the remnants of the Millerite movement, which was created to await the world’s end. In White’s end times view, the Jewish Sabbath and the Catholic Church play prominent roles.

According to her, the papacy is the seven-headed beast from the sea in Revelation 13:1–10. Accompanying this beast is a lamb-like beast from the earth (Rev. 13:11–18). The latter causes the world to worship the former and has an image made of it. White proclaimed that the second beast is the United States (The Great Controversy, 387–8), and that it will force people to worship the papacy by "enforcing some observance which shall be an act of homage to the papacy" (ibid., 389). This observance, she says, is Sunday worship rather than Saturday worship.

White claims that the papacy changed the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday, making this change a mark of its authority. In her view, there will come a time when the United States will establish a "national Sunday law" and compel its citizens to worship on Sunday and thus take the mark of the beast. It will not compel them to become Catholics, but to join a Protestant state-church that is an "image" of the papacy, and thus, "the image of the beast" (ibid., 382–96).

Seventh-Day Adventism cannot change its views on the Catholic Church being the Whore of Babylon without admitting that it was wrong on Sunday worship. It cannot admit that Sunday worship is not the mark of the beast without changing its views on the Jewish Sabbath. Seventh-Day Adventism cannot cease to be anti-Catholic without ceasing to be Seventh-Day Adventism.

There is a "moderate" wing of Adventism that is more open to Catholics as individuals (though still retaining White’s views concerning the papacy). In fact, White was willing to concede that—in the here and now (before the end times)—some Catholics are saved. She wrote that "there are now true Christians in every church, not excepting the Roman Catholic communion, who honestly believe that Sunday is the Sabbath of divine appointment. God accepts their sincerity of purpose and their integrity before him. But when Sunday observance shall be enforced by law, and the world shall be enlightened concerning the obligation of the true Sabbath, then whoever shall transgress the command of God, to obey a precept which has no higher authority than Rome, will thereby honor popery above God" (ibid., 395).

Unfortunately, this one tolerant statement is embedded in hundreds of hostile statements. While this aspect of her teaching can be played up by her more moderate followers, it is difficult for them to do so, because the whole Adventist milieu in which they exist is anti-Catholic. The group is an eschatology sect, and its central eschatological teaching, other than Christ’s Second Coming, is that the Second Coming will be preceded by a period in which the papacy will enforce Sunday worship on the world. Everyone who does not accept the papacy’s Sunday worship will be killed; and everyone who does accept the papacy’s Sunday worship will be destroyed by God.

You got that from a progaganda site so I'm not paying attention to it. Next...

Ahh! Typical closed-minded Mindia. What else did we expect?