1 2 3 4 5 10 15 | bottom
Quote# 116317

David Bowie,Alan Rickman BOTH DIE AT 69
*BLOOD CONTRACT FOR FAME CASHED IN?!*

In this video we go into David Bowie and Alan Rickman BOTH DIED AT the age 69 Glen Frey from the Eagles also died and how they were all heavily into the occult amongst other celebrities that I cover in this powerful video!
Did they sell their soul for fortune and fame to Satan?
And did the Devil cash in?!

LIFE CHANGER, Godlike Productions 28 Comments [1/26/2016 3:45:13 AM]
Fundie Index: 18

Quote# 116316

so are we supposed to sit back and let satan run rampant in society?

YOU NEED TO SPREAD YOUR WINGS AND PROCLAIM HIS FAULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IT IS TIME TO TAKE BACK WHAT IS OURS!!!!!!

It starts with compassion for all..everything stems from there...but every person on this forum can fight satan with their actions and deeds and prayers and meditations. Also If your talented enough to be in the 5th dimension show the demons who God really is there too.

Perfect example of under satans rule. NBA BASKETBALL GAMES.
Perfect place to take your kids right? WRONG. Scandilous dancers dancing every 10 minutes in barely any clothes. Scratch off Lottery ticket give away in stands. Casino advertisments everywhere. Booze advertisements. Oh not to mention a hot dog and coke costs 15 dollars. Simple example. One of millions.

So what are you going to do about it?

Anonymous Coward, Godlike Productions 27 Comments [1/26/2016 3:45:06 AM]
Fundie Index: 13

Quote# 116315

The Archbishop of Toledo, Braulio Rodríguez, has caused controversy with a series of comments on domestic violence he made during a sermon.

The majority of cases of domestic violence happen because the woman’s partner "does not accept them" or "rejects them for not accepting their demands" he told the congregation.

He went on to lay the blame for many cases of domestic violence on the woman in the relationship.

"Often the macho reaction comes about because she asked for a separation," the archbishop said, according to local newspaper, Periódico CLM.

He also questioned the use of the term "domestic violence" during the sermon, given during a mass held in Toledo Cathedral on December 27th. His comments were published in the Our Father parish bulletin.

Archbishop Rodríguez also used his sermon to complain that many problem relationships came about becuase they were not " a true marriage" and he also slammed the practice of "quickie divorces".

"I don’t think our political leaders are worried about divorce figures when they have fought so hard to implement the so-called 'quickie divorce'," he said.

Archbishop Braulio Rodriguez , The Local 13 Comments [1/26/2016 3:24:02 AM]
Fundie Index: 12
Submitted By: Yossarian Lives

Quote# 116314

[on a mechanic refusing to serve gays]

if a good ole boy doesn't want a gay gallivanting around his garage while he puts in his stroker, drops in his pushrod, bolts on a blower or screws your nuts then he has a right to refuse service especially if the truck will be used in a gay wedding.

[He can't say "I don't serve black people here" and it works the same way with gay people. He's a moron]

No that is a protected class and skin color is not like gayness.

[But if it's ok to discriminate then maybe there should be no protected classes?

How can you stand for freedom and tell me it's not ok to discriminate based on religion or skin color?]

No there should be protected class but where you put your junk isn't one of them.

If where you put your junk is a protected class then ALL on the LGBTPQQ should be a protected class from fur players to denim dress wearing polys.

[yes we know. you are pro discrimination.]

No I am pro religious freedom. I am pro constitution.

[no. you're pro discrimination. the constitution has been amended many times. if all you're saying is you'll argee with anything that's currently in the constitution you're even more morally bankrupt than I thought.

200 years ago you'd be appealing to its authority to validate your opinion on why women didn't deserve to vote, and why black people should be slaves.]


Homosexuality is a behavior,not a gender or a skin color.Sexuality is far less innate than skin color. And since sexuality is not protected and religion is, a behavioral code that limits any assumed innate behavior based on deeply held religious conviction would and should trump that behavior on one's premises.

It is wrong to use the government to force a business to do certain things. One of them is to force them to allow certain behavior on their premises or create an expression that violates their free ex.

Now we agree on the existing protected class. I do not agree with sexuality being one.

[So your sexuality is a "behavior?"

How is Religion different from a "behavior?"

If we go by that standard, Religion shouldn't be a protected class either.]

Yes.

Religion is protected. Are you arguing that it shouldn't be a protected class?

[ I'm saying that if your definition of what constitutes a protected class is that anything that can be defined as a "Behavior" and not something you were born with should not qualify, then Religion does not qualify either.

You choose to follow a Religion. You choose to be religious. That's a behavior.

Do you also believe that gay people can be fixed through therapy?]

Yes religion is important enough to to be protected. Your sexual urges are not.

Fedorfan500, Mixed Martial Arts 28 Comments [1/25/2016 6:36:58 PM]
Fundie Index: 15
Submitted By: randy

Quote# 116313

["I was always sceptical about ordained Orthodox female rabbis. And now one has now been given a job in an Orthodox synagogue. That should surely suggest it is becoming acceptable. Do you envisage that happening in the UK?"]

In a word, no. Don’t get me started on these pseudo-suffragettes, or should that read “rabbragettes”? In any event, she got a job in an “Open-Orthodox” synagogue – whatever that means. Suffice it to say, a little digging and one discovers on the website that on the High Holidays they have a “family section” in their synagogue, i.e. no mechitza and men and women sit together.

So, in summation, when someone gets “ordained” in some so-called Orthodox manner and immediately takes up her posting in a synagogue that breaches some of the fundamentals of Orthodoxy (I guess that’s what they mean by “open”), then you have to call into question the establishment that “ordains” these women and indeed the women’s own levels of conviction.
My father always told me: “If the end result is no good, then you know the whole premise is flawed.

["Do you have an issue with fashion chain H&M selling a scarf that looks like a Jewish prayer shawl? H&M has apologised, but weren’t critics being over-sensitive?"]

Over-sensitive is an understatement. I only wonder, if one wears one to shul on Shabbat morning, have you fulfilled your spiritual duty or do you still need to go in and listen to the rabbi’s sermon?

Actually come to think of it, it’s a win-win for women in partnership services. Not only can they pretend their service is Orthodox, they can even pretend they are wearing a tallit.

Rabbi Yitzchak Schochet, Jewish News Online 9 Comments [1/25/2016 6:35:55 PM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 116310

[My question is simple: Why on EARTH is homosexuality even controversial? At all?]

-Why WAS it controversial? Because people used to be intolerant and hugely violent monsters who would punish things they couldn't understand.
-Why does it continue to be controversial? Because some people still don't understand or agree with it, gay people and gay proponents don't like that and remember how horrible this used to be in the past, and neither side can see things from the other's perspective.

And no, I'm not implying there aren't still people who will do horribly mean or even violent things to homosexuals, like ostracize or beat them. But that is a medieval and cruel way of acting -- I'm not sure if I've ever met someone personally who didn't think it was cruel an inappropriate -- but it doesn't change the fact that in some case homosexual proponents will respond to criticism or even just plain old disagreement with them by treating the person like they're one of these monsters. That's projection, and as someone who has multiple homosexual friends and is pretty damn respectful of their way of life despite disagreeing with it, I don't much care to be lumped in with that sort.

Homophobe is used as a slur in a number of conversations I've been in, so I don't care to be identified by it. Most use of the term indicates fear or hatred of homosexuals, not just plain disagreement. Some uses do just mean disagreement, but considering that it has two distinct uses you might be cautious about using the word without clarifying your intended use, or else you will offend people who simply disagree with homosexuality because they can easily interpret it as you accusing them of hatred, fear, and the like. Bottom line is I don't care if people don't like it that I don't agree with their lifestyle; I don't agree with it, but I'm perfectly pleasant with every homosexual and bisexual I know. I don't see why I don't deserve the same respect they deserve for... having my own thoughts and way of life... without hurting anyone. I don't particularly think it's cool to call someone a name for that, and I do frankly liken it to using homosexual slurs; I don't see why we have to call people names when they're being plenty pleasant with people. Calling the monstrous people who do try to hurt homosexuals is a-okay by me, but I think it's a little silly to invent a new slur for it. Why not just call them what they are? Hateful jerks and/or monsters.

Anyway, enough of that. Back to the topic question...

What is my problem with homosexuality? It's not something that makes sense to me. I don't mean that I'm just like "but, wuh-wuh-why would someone like the same sex, durrr", I mean that it functionally doesn't have any place that I can see. The more common phrasing you'll hear people say is something like "I don't believe homosexuality is natural", and then that gets quickly rebutted by citations of examples of homosexuality in nature among animals. Yes, some animals -- not all -- engage in homosexual relations. That doesn't do anything to change the fact that it doesn't make sense to me. Animals doing it is NOT a good argument in favor of homosexuality since animals engage in certain other practices humans generally universally consider taboo: Cannibalism, necrophilia, murder, rape, torture, etc., and not all of these are even out of necessity; dolphins murder and rape the corpses of porpoises for fun. Throwing aside the animal example entirely and going with things like "it feels good so how can it be wrong", absolutely everything that "feels good" can kill you in excess, and other things that feel good can damage you outright like a number of drugs. Impulse and desire are not universal tools for determining right and wrong; this cannot be argued. Like anyone, I have angry and destructive impulses that I have to control to be a decent person.

So since I cannot see a reason for homosexuality to exist -- the distinctive traits between the genders pretty visibly only exist for the sake of breeding and I don't really see the point of sexual love unless it's driven by the breeding impulse (not saying you can only have sex to have kids either; don't misunderstand me) -- I find it unnatural, and therefore I disagree with it. To be clear: I don't think it's immoral or hurtful, I think it just plain doesn't make sense, I don't like to see people do things to themselves that I feel are illogical. Sure, plenty of people argue that they were born that way, but I have my doubts, and either way that can also be argued against in the same way animal behavior can; not every pre-existing psychological state people are born with is a good thing either. I'll say this: Human beings are exceptional at deluding themselves; it's seen best in the general human disdain for being wrong. I can't know for sure if that's the case with homosexuals -- I'm not one -- but I wouldn't write it off, at least in some cases. It's also because of this that I worry about overarching appreciation -- not acceptance, but an almost eagerness that I see from time to time -- towards homosexuality, because I've seen cases of people who I believe more or less deluded themselves into acting as homosexuals. Cases where they had a string of bad relationships, declared they hated the opposite sex, and then sought same-sex relationships as some kind of solution to this, which is an absolutely poisonous reason. Maybe this was a case of "the right thing in the wrong way" for some of them and they really were born homosexual, but I really don't believe it was the case for all of them.

That does not mean people shouldn't do what they feel is right; if someone's thought something through and decided the way they're going to be -- where that's a decision of how to act moving forward or a decision to embrace certain pre-existing impulses they already had, it doesn't matter -- then they should embrace it, live by it fully, and do it in the face of anyone who thinks they shouldn't. I'm free to question their decisions the same as they're free to question mine, but in the end I respect that they made their decision and decided who they're going to be, and it's their decision, not mine. I just can't justify it -- that's probably why I'm not gay or bi. :P

Finally to end off on the point of just letting people love... well, I think I've made it plenty clear that I do let people love, and advocate that others do as well. :bleh: As for how it affects my personal view of homosexuality, I still factor it into how I don't see why. Again, I see sexual relations as something evolved as an incentive to breed -- whether or not it's used for that exclusively -- so I don't really understand why someone would express their love sexually for the same sex. I "love" both males and females in my life, but the only ones I have sexual (or, romantic, if you prefer; they're the same thing) feelings for are some of the females... and I don't see how anything else makes sense. *shrug*

[I'm happy to see that you are reasonable and let people love. I just don't understand why people think sex has to involve reproduction anymore, we aren't going to go extinct due to lack of population anytime soon. I guess that they naturally feel the same way about the same sex and you and I feel about the opposite. We don't need to disagree with things just because we don't understand.

Why should a homosexual have to abstain from marriage and sex? Sure, maybe not everything that feels natural is "right", please respond relevantly and specifically for why homosexuality is wrong?]


I disagree with anything that is unnatural, significant and important, and that is either harmful to others (which homosexuality isn't) or harmful to oneself; I do feel homosexually is somewhat self-harmful, and the reason for that is because I don't think it logically makes sense -- I consider it a strange fallacy -- and therefore I think people who engage in it are deluding themselves with that fallacy. The fallacy is this: Sexual relations exist for reproduction, therefore two individuals who have can't and would never be able to reproduce have zero reason to get involved sexually in the first place.

And I said I don't think sex has to involve reproduction. I guess that's confusing so I'll explain: Sex only existed in the first place for reproduction; I don't think there's any disagreement on that. Every animal has their mating habits, from penguins who leave their partners after a year, to wolf packs who usually stay together in a big family all their life. As near as I can see, on a primal level human mating habits are to form families around their sexual relations and form links that way. This started for reproduction, but of course it has other facets and it's obvious that not every heterosexual marriage leads to kids or can even have kids considering things like sterility, but that doesn't mean the relationship doesn't have merit; people still engage in every other facet of the relation because humans are built to connect that way. I don't believe people are purely primal -- we're well beyond that -- so of course people can make their own decisions about how to live, but this is why I see homosexual relations as a fallacy. Yes people hook up and marry for reasons other than reproduction -- because we're hardwired to -- but that doesn't mean that the reproductive urge wasn't a part of why we do it in the first place. Not following the reproductive urge to its eventual purpose? I get it. Having sexual relations with people you can't reproduce with in the first place? It doesn't make sense as a concept.

Since I know you'll ask me what is wrong with homosexuals not following that urge through completely either, I'll simply say: Because there's no reason for them to have the urge towards one another in the first place.

The reason I think homosexuals or people who identify as homosexual in part or in full should resist their urges is because I think indulging in them is the same as indulging in a fallacy, and I never think that's the best thing for someone to do.


Axle The Beast, Zelda Dungeon 18 Comments [1/25/2016 6:34:49 PM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: randy

Quote# 116307

Impeach Barack Hussein Obama
by Asderathos
i
86
-UPDATE-
***********************************************
not all that is legal is just - We must find a candidate of honor by 2012 [NO not Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin]
***********************************************


-OLDE-
_______________________________________

The SPIRIT of the Constitution Has been Violated
_______________________________________

Violation of Rights To Life Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness etc
___

Life - Abortion (& partial Birth Abortion) IE Infanticide

Liberty - Centralized Govt is a violation of state's rights,

Pursuit of Happiness - Affirmative Action, Taxation without representation (fed taxes in particular),

Freedom of Religion - Public religious displays & prayer in school are banned in some places (ITS NOT FREEDOM FROM)
___

2nd amendment was violated for Years in DC gun ban
___

_______________________________________________

but the Socialist outrages, destruction of what's left of the constitution, & Ivory Tower Socialist Professor Policies
will eventually come home to roost.

asderathos, deviantart 16 Comments [1/25/2016 5:51:01 PM]
Fundie Index: 14

Quote# 116303

A video of Al-Azhar Theology Professor Suad Saleh is going viral as it shows her justifying sexual enslavement. In an episode of her TV show, Fiqh El Mar2a (Arabic for Women’s Jurisprudence), which aired on September 12th 2014 on El Hayah 2, the scholar said that Islam organises milk al yameen - the Islamic concept of owning women - by strictly limiting the practise to legitimate wars between Muslims and their enemies, where non-Muslim women are considered spoils of war. “In order to humiliate them, they become the property of the army commander, or of a Muslim, and he can have sex with them just like he has sex with his wives,” she explains.

Prof. Suad Saleh, Cairoscene 8 Comments [1/25/2016 5:50:37 PM]
Fundie Index: 10

Quote# 116298

Thankfully, we soon moved out into the country, we found that there were no trick-or-treaters out here. The local small shops downtown would have a night for everyone to go to and get their treat instead.

The first Halloween out at our new place, was quite memorable to my children. They had such peace and joy that night, it almost shone off of their faces. I had to ask them why this was so, for it confused me. They then asked me in astonishment, “Mom! Can’t you SEE them? The angels are EVERYWHERE! Can’t you hear their singing?” Well, sadly, I could not. But it was enough for me to see their own contentment on such a night, for I had been concerned that we would have trouble during that time. (This was during the worst of what we were going through with our cursed land, and right before I learned about cleaning the land.) That night, thanks to all the angels and to our God Jesus Christ the messiah for sending them, we had no problems at all.

The following year, we learned more lessons about Halloween.

When we would go out shopping, we would come across Halloween decorations that were filled with demons. We could feel them try to reach out and attack us. We found that we could not cast them out, (for they were often there through legal rights given to them by the owner of the store,) but we were able to bind them up in the name of Jesus, so that they would be forced to leave us alone. Still though, it became a stressful time in general to be out shopping, so we tried to curtail the number of outings we make during the season. For us, it has become more of a day and a season of mourning instead, especially when we see those around us look upon the holiday as nothing but a bit of harmless fun.

Dreams of Dunamis, Dreams of Dunamis 22 Comments [1/25/2016 5:50:02 PM]
Fundie Index: 8

Quote# 116295



Britain First, Facebook 46 Comments [1/25/2016 3:55:04 AM]
Fundie Index: 26

Quote# 116294

Recently, right-wing commentator Larry Tomczak unveiled something he is calling the "30 Day Bullseye Challenge," which consists of 30 short videos outlining the proper Christian worldview on everything from abortion and capital punishment to masturbation and sexting.

Several of the videos, unsurprisingly, address topics related to the issue of homosexuality, which Tomczak explained inevitably leads to disease and misery.

"With all the hoopla about this one and that one, hey, they're coming out and it being a time to celebrate gay marriage and gay lifestyles as normal, natural, beautiful," he said, "people need to awaken ... to the reality that this so-called love story doesn't have a happy ending."

While rattling off a list of statistics about the supposed dangers of gay sex, Tomczak warned that "although heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals by a ratio of at least 20 to 1, homosexual pedophiles commit about one-third of the total number of child sex offenses."

"Depending on the source, homosexual men have an average lifetime number of sexual partners falling anywhere between — listen to this — 250 to 500," he continued. "Engaging in sodomy with the sewage system of another's anatomy is contrary to God's design and it will bring inevitable consequences."

Larry Tomczak, Right Wing Watch 18 Comments [1/25/2016 3:54:53 AM]
Fundie Index: 14
Submitted By: TimeToTurn

Quote# 116292

Atheism. Atheism is not a religion. It is most remote from being a part of this great section. As we know, all atheists are in denial of the simple epistemologicial reality of the "theists". At best, atheism is pure closet homosexuality in public, where the disfigured, disgruntled completely irrational minded man says in front of everybody's face for no apparent reason, completely irrational statements, disguised on purpose which is what's worse. How do we expect a world of rationality and clear thought, to widen our horizons one day, when the level of rationality we see before us is as putrid as an example of this particular type of atheist? How can an atheist even claim his position is religious, or "one of religion", when it completely ignores this significant title by being nothing but a position of hatred? The answer is that it is not a religion, nor has ever been a religion. And the world better wisen up if it expects to one day have categories of religion taken seriously.

So I am furious that atheists believe they can be public homosexuals, physically and irrationally disfigured, christian hating "free souls", with no care to the consequences. But that nevertheless is not the point of my thread. I am furious at YOU, the atheist reader, and his public obvious stupiditys and personal hatreds. Furious with the many instances of atheist "morality" and hundreds of millenia worth of credit towards atheists/atheism. This is the essense of stupidity people, you will not be warned again.

By the by, this IS the reason this is in the religion subforum, I hope you all had a very lovely read, please feel free to reply in kind, I've waited about a month before returning to this low, debased forum for posting my thread about this topic. A topic about religiousness. Please feel free to "express" your religion. :angel:

JBrentonK, AtheistForums.org 31 Comments [1/25/2016 3:54:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 20
Submitted By: Stimbo

Quote# 116291

1: And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see.
2: And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.


WTC Massacre, Pentagon....by Mossad....turned the tide of Global Power to the Talmudic Chassidim, the New Pharisees of Chabad Lubavitch, who are bringing in their "Olam Haba" New World Order, under satanic Judaic Talmudic evil. By use of their much touted "War on Terror" and their "Homelandt "SAY" Kurity, soon the total global enforcement of their Universal Noahide Laws of Mystery Babylon will be globally enforced by the arms of the Pimp of the Great Harlot has gone forth to conquer Planet Earth for the diabolical god they have made to themselves and planet earth.

3: And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see.
4: And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword.


The Great Harlot of Satanic Talmudism, which they have made the Laws of Amerika, Via HJR 104, Public Law 102-14 voted into Law by 2/3's congress in 1991, and signed into the Law of the land by the ex-president George Herbert Walker Bush, has instituted the final slaughter of any opposition to their "New World Order". Ishmael first, then any who stand firm in the Testimony of Jesus Christ the Everlasting Holy Covenant.

Then cometh their Talmudic flesh man who will say that he is the True Christ, but he will not be, but he is their anointed king, their man of David, who is not of David the King, but an imposter of Talmudism which will bemuse and fool all who dwell upon the earth whose names are not written in the Lamb's book of life slain since the foundation of the world.

Behold the son of perdition to be "Revealed" very soon, for the midst of the seventy weeks began when Arik Sheinerman (Ariel Sharon) gave the command to "Finish" their wall of flesh partition around their flesh Israel.

5: And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand.
6: And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine.


For they have already stated that the Gold is in their hands, and indeed it is. This Moshiach they call him, their anointed king of flesh, their "Replacement Jesus" will institute his Mark, that Mark of His name, that Mark of Moloch, that six pointed star of their flesh that they have made with their hands, that Mark of Apostate Solomon, the Red Shield of Rothschild, that Mark of their Obedient Goyim Noahide Freemasons unto Moloch whom they call their architect of the Universe, that Mark of their Esther, Easter, Astarte, Ishatar, Venus......aka Lucifer.........Moshiach ben Dovid their coming false Messiah. Once this Mark has been globally enforced Via the Talmudic "Homelandt" "SAY" kurity by these sayers who are not the seed of Abraham by faith in Christ Jesus, according to the Promise of Salvation unto any who stand firm and believe the Lord, then no man will buy or sell the whore's merchandises. Only faith in the Creator will substain these in faith.


John, Southern American Marketing, Inc. 18 Comments [1/25/2016 3:50:58 AM]
Fundie Index: 8

Quote# 116290

The simple facts are that after the death of Solomon, the Kingdom of Israel was divided into two kingdoms. The Northern Kingdom - composed of ten (10) tribes, with the capital at Samaria, called "Israel," and the Southern Kingdom - composed of only two (2) tribes (Judah & Benjamin), with the capital at Jerusalem, called "Judah." Both of these Kingdoms went into Captivity to Babylon within a few short years of each other, due to Israel’s sins of pride and rebellion. Contrary to what most teach and believe, the following Biblical giants were never "Jews."

* ABRAHAM - was a Hebrew (racial)
* ISSAC - was a Hebrew
* JACOB - was a Hebrew
* MOSES - was a Levite (tribal)
* PAUL – was a Benjaminite and BECAME a devout and religious JEW BY CHOICE!
* JESUS – was/is The Son of God, a strict adherent of His own Law, but never a JEW!

SAUL THE PHARISEE/JEW

Saul was a racial Israelite, a Roman citizen - born in Tarsus and studied the “Traditions of the Elders/Fathers” (Gal 1:14) under the Pharisee, Gemaliel, in Jerusalem in his youth and became the “golden haired boy” of the controlling Jewish establishment. At this time, prior to his conversion, Saul was a vicious, Babylonian Talmudic Pharisaic Antichrist that persecuted the followers of “The Way” to their deaths, arresting both men and women and throwing them into prison whenever the opportunity arose. Paul wrote: "You have heard of my earlier CAREER in Judaism - how furiously I persecuted the Church of God, and made havoc of it; and how in devotion to Judaism I out-stripped many men of may own age among my people, being far more zealous than they for the tradition of my forefathers" (Gal 1:13, 14, Weymouth Translation)

Clearly while in Judaism, Saul persecuted Christians due to his intense hatred for believers, because of his total commitment to the fraternity holding to the “traditions of the fathers.” Paul at that time, was a Jew BY RELIGION ONLY!

Please carefully read it again, “And profited in the Jews' RELIGION above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.” (Gal 1:14 KJV)

When Paul became a Christian, HE CEASED BEING A “JEW” as such, simply because Pharisaism (Judaism, Jewry) TOTALLY CONTRADICTED EVERYTHING he now stood for as an Apostle of Christ.

In fact, this very system of religious/cultish legalism called "Jewry" was something of which even Jesus Himself would NOT walk. This is so incredibly important to understand!!! “After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would NOT WALK IN JEWRY, BECAUSE THE JEWS SOUGHT TO KILL HIM.”[/b] (John 7:1) These "Jews" that were determined to KILL Christ were the cozy, religious (freemasonic) establishment of the Scribes and Pharisees that held considerable political power during the time of the brutal Roman occupation of Palestine, where Jesus openly condemned their status-seeking and carnal, ego-centric attitudes.

Despite the occupation, the Babylonian Talmudic Pharisees were given near total autonomy in dealing with all so-called “religious” matters, where after the death of Herod the Great, Judea was reduced to a Roman province under a procurator. It was under the fifth procurator, Pontius Pilate, that Jesus Christ was crucified, by order of the Pharisees of whom the Sanhedrin were the supreme ruling/decision-making body. It was these JEWS who ordered the death of Christ. The “Jews" referred to, meant the high priests, the Sanhedrin, the scribes and the Pharisees, all of whom earned the scorn of our Lord because of the total abuse of their authority. The religious establishment saw The Lord Jesus as a threat to their power base because he was becoming popular with the people, who had several times sought to make him their king.

Hence the term "Jew" refers to the followers of this Pharisaic system of religionised law based on men’s traditions and upon generations of subjective interpretations of God’s Law/Word that ultimately became "Talmudic Judaism.” It was and still is, a powerful, influential and liberal religious sect where only a select and privileged few were invited to join. "Judaism denotes the Jewish faith in its extravagant form of blind attachment to rites and traditions, and national exclusiveness. This must have been prevalent in the time of Christ, because of His constant exposure of their formalism and self-assumption, and because in John's Gospel 'the Jews' is used as synonymous with opposers of Christ and His teachings." (The Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. II, (1901), p. 999).

ISRAEL - THE JEWS AND GENEALOGY

When asked the question, "Who is Israel? - Who is a Jew?" the Israeli Government's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) answered thus:

"The term Israelite is purely Biblical. An Israeli is a citizen of Israel, regardless of religion. A Jew is a person anywhere in the world born to a Jewish mother, or converted to Judaism, who is thus identified as a member of the Jewish people and religion.”

Notice here that the Jews themselves clearly imply that the term "Israelite" and "Jew" are separate and distinct and where Jews have no relation whatsoever with the Biblical Noahatic bloodline. In fact, under the heading "A Brief History of the Terms for Jew," in the 1980 Jewish Almanac, is the following incredible admission:

"Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a "Jew" or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or a Hebrew".

A JEW IS NOT TO BE CONSIDERED AN ISRAELITE!

Today, to trace anyone's descent to ancient Palestine would be a genealogical impossibility. The Jewish racial myth flows from the fact that the words ‘Hebrew,’ ‘Israelite,’ ‘Jew,’ ‘Judaism,’ and the ‘Jewish people’ have been used synonymously to suggest a historic continuity, but this is a gross misuse. The descriptive name Judaism was never heard by the Hebrews or Israelites; it appears only within modern Christianity. The English abbreviation, 'Jew,’ is recent and does not correspond to anything denoted by the Aramaic, Greek or Roman terms for 'Judahite' or 'Judean,’ which were in use during the lifetime of Jesus. In fact, according to Reporting Guidelines for the Australian Press Council, General Press Release No. 49 (issued June 1982) with reference to the word "Race" as applied to Jews.

“The Press Council wishes to alert editors to a common mistake. There is no "Jewish race". Judaism is not a race but a religion. There are Caucasian Jews, Mongolian Jews, Oriental Jews, Semitic Jews and so on - terms defining both racial origin and religion. The Council asks all editors and sub-editors to watch for this error . . . .”

During Christ’s lifetime, no persons were described as "Jews" anywhere. This very important FACT is supported by sound theology, suppressed historical truth and science. When Jesus was in Judea, it was not the "homeland" of the ancestors of those who today style themselves as "Jews". Their ancestors never set-foot anywhere near Judea. They existed at that time in Asia, their true "homeland", and were known as Chazars, or Turkish Mongols. Banned author Douglas Reed, in his superbly researched classic, “Controversy of Zion,” writes:

"No authority, Judaist or other, would support the claim to blood decent from Judah for the so-called Jews of today." In fact, the Palestinians would have more claim to the racial description, 'Semite', than any within modern Jewry who are of Eastern-European stock and trace their lineage back to the ancient Asiatic kingdom of the Chazar”.


Ray Novosel, Southern American Marketing, Inc. 24 Comments [1/25/2016 3:50:41 AM]
Fundie Index: 18

Quote# 116289

My Beliefs are perfectly sound so here they are,first of all many good Christians have left this forum,simply because they have seen you goats are a waste of space,they have also noticed that God has hardened your hearts,and salvation is nigh on impossible for you goats,so alas they have moved on.They see you searching for evidence to deny God,and see you believing in evolution which there is not a scrap of evidence for. all so very strange.But when considered Satan has you in his grip,deception is the active word.

 Also God is today judging this country and America. We see this country falling apart,one report showed 23 people living in one house in squalor and the cry goes out bring them in fill the country,and the infrastructure buckles,we have a NHS and some people have no doctors,bring on the de-creation of this God-less country.

May look in tomorrow.

~TW~, Religion and Ethics 16 Comments [1/25/2016 3:50:07 AM]
Fundie Index: 16
Submitted By: Nearly Sane

Quote# 116288

Generally speaking, the field of psychology is a modern, and tenerally anti-Christian and anti-Orthodox thing in both its origins and most of its applications, for it really purports to replace the Church as the means of treating the soul of man. That Christians, even Orthodox ones, have managed to turn some of its tendencies to good use doesn't change the overall concept, that man's behavior may be predicted, controlled, and separated from his spiritual life, that it need have no connection to religious Truth. You've got it wrong. It gasn't been hijacked. It IS a hijack, and it is Christian hijacking of the anti-Christian thing that can sometimes be justified.
So I'll go on bashing psychology. I look at its history, what it arose among, when and why, and why much more intelligent men of earlier centuries saw no such thing, and have decided that it needs to be bashed. The psych "sciences" are pseudo-sciences, that are only right coincidentally, insofar as they align with the truth about the human soul.

rusmeister, Christian Forums 11 Comments [1/25/2016 3:48:52 AM]
Fundie Index: 10
Submitted By: Armoured

Quote# 116286


Tickets go on sale Jan. 19 for the opening next July of the Ark Encounter, a true-to-size replica of the ark of Genesis. It’s a project of Answers in Genesis (AIG), the founders of the Creation Museum. And reservations for tour times will be made for the first 40 days – and 40 nights.

A visit to the Ark Encounter may draw one closer to the Lord as a believer reconnects with the Genesis narrative in Scripture. The need for this firm foundation intensifies every day.

In a video at the Ark website, Ken Ham, president of AIG and the Ark Encounter, comments that while the cross is our greatest reminder of salvation, he believes Noah’s ark is salvation’s next most powerful symbol.

God saved a tiny remnant in the midst of a devastating judgment on a deeply depraved world, and right up to the closing of the door, unbelievers hurled insults, mocking and scoffing Noah and his obedience. And then the end came, with no escape for the wicked.

There’s a similar chasm forming in America, dividing not just Christians and unbelievers, but faithful and compromised Christians. Many leftists consider themselves Christians, but their “fruit” tells a different story.

As pro-life warriors stand in vigil in our nation’s capital and recall the abortion holocaust this week at the March for Life, we need to reconnect with God as Creator, while we remember that He is also our judge.

God wiped every human from the earth through a divinely ordained disaster, except for the faithful eight. Is abortion God’s judgment on America? Are we enacting, through “choice,” our own spiritual demise, our own “flood” of destruction? It’s a deeply troubling thought.

Linda Harvey, WND 41 Comments [1/24/2016 4:56:30 AM]
Fundie Index: 19

Quote# 116285

Saudi Arabia’s grand mufti has ruled that chess is forbidden in Islam, saying it encourages gambling and is a waste of time.

Sheikh Abdulaziz al-Sheikh was answering a question on a television show in which he issues fatwas in response to viewers’ queries on everyday religious matters.

He said chess was “included under gambling” and was “a waste of time and money and a cause for hatred and enmity between players”.

Sheikh justified the ruling by referring to the verse in the Qur’an banning “intoxicants, gambling, idolatry and divination”. It is not clear when the fatwa was delivered.

Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Iraq’s supreme Shia religious authority, has previously issued rulings forbidding chess.

Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdulaziz al-Sheikh, The Guardian 42 Comments [1/24/2016 4:43:22 AM]
Fundie Index: 25

Quote# 116284

[Anonymous and Mike discuss their "negative experiences" in Reform congregations.]

Anonymous: In another Reform congregation, the Lesbian rabbi married her female partner (who had converted to Judaism) under a chuppah! So, not to sound prejudiced, but the same rabbi has been converting other gays to Reform Judaism (she has a book on how to do it in ten minutes) and marrying them. It goes agains all Orthodox and Torah values for men to marry men and women to marry women. So, it is not just assimilation that is killing American Jewry, the same Jewish organizations are promoting a watered down form of Judaism that I do not call Judaism. I know somewhere it says that Jewish leaders who lead Jews astray are committing one of the worst sins.

Mike: I also had an experience with a friday night reform service that I attended, not knowing what reform was about, and it was quite hair-raising, I think the highlights were: openly gay rabbi, playing electrically amplified music on shabbat (with boyfriend), being happy seeing intermarried couples, and inviting an anti-semitic lutheran priest and being upset that people interrupted the priest when we was bashing Israelis, and at the end of the 'service' (I actually do not remember any prayers of any kind), encouraging the sale of products on shabbat for charity.

Anonymous and Mike, Aish.com 13 Comments [1/24/2016 4:23:31 AM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 116280

[Now deleted thread OP]

Rape victims often develop a variety of serious psychological issues, including depression, borderline personality disorder (aka borderline insanity disorder), self-harm, alcohol and/or drug addiction, and PTSD.

People who have these serious psychological issues are at a higher risk of joblessness, homelessness, and divorce. They tend to have unstable and chaotic relationships.

Now, of course it isn't a rape victim's fault that they were raped, but that still doesn't mean that it is a good idea to date a rape victim.

Dating someone who has serious psychological issues is risky. To illustrate how risky it is, would you date a pedophile? Pedophilia isn't a choice. However, pedophiles have unstable lives and wouldn't make good romantic partners.

So, if you expect a man to be willing to date a rape victim because "it wasn't her fault," then you should be willing to date a pedophile because "it isn't his fault."

insurrecto, r/PurplePillDebate 24 Comments [1/24/2016 4:23:07 AM]
Fundie Index: 17
Submitted By: Demon Duck of Doom

Quote# 116279

When you're speaking with an atheist, the Bible says you are dealing with a "fool" (see Psalm 14:1). This isn't someone who is a clown or a court jester. They are people of skill. You're not dealing with someone who is of a low intellect. That person can't help having a low IQ.

You are dealing with someone who has willfully blown out the inner light that God has given to every man. Such a person has already disqualified themselves from reasonable conversation. They can't be reasoned with because their worldview denies that which is axiomatic or commonsense. This is because atheism gives him the temporary license to look at porn, to fornicate, etc., without a sense of moral responsibility to a Creator. For a sin-loving sinner, it's like a dream come true, and so he will say anything to defend those pleasures, including denying that which is obvious.

What you must do is move away from his "carnal" mind that's at enmity with the moral Law (see Romans 8:7), and the place to go is where Jesus went--to his conscience.

Ray Comfort, Facebook 30 Comments [1/24/2016 4:19:33 AM]
Fundie Index: 17
Submitted By: Nemo

Quote# 116278

Yahweh is the main Star of the Bible, Jesus gets a minor supporting role, and the Holy Spirit is virtually ignored. Why is this? Because the biblical documents reflect the theologies of the men who wrote them. Take the apostle Paul, for example. He didn’t come anywhere close to accepting Jesus as Yahweh’s equal (see The Great Offense of Paul: Rejecting the Divinity of Christ). To Paul, there was only one God: Yahweh. Jesus was just Yahweh’s super great human Servant on earth who turned out to be the fulfillment of all of those Old Testament Messianic prophecies. Paul was an adherent of Judaism who accepted the idea that Yahweh’s Messiah had finally come and that Yahweh had ended the sacrificial system. But Paul didn’t qualify as a Christian because a true Christian must submit to Jesus as God Almighty, not just submit to Him as some impressive human being. Listen to how Paul totally insults Christ in this passage:

For there is one God and one mediator between God and humanity, Christ Jesus, Himself human, who gave Himself—a ransom for all, a testimony at the proper time. (1 Tim. 2:5-6)

You see? Paul says there is only one God and Christ is not that God, because Christ is just a human who mediates between the one God—Yahweh—and human beings. Sure, Paul acknowledges that Christ gave Himself up as a ransom for sin. But so what? If you do not accept the Divinity of Christ, you’re going to Hell. Kinda makes you wonder where Paul is today, doesn’t it? Paul wrote a lot of epistles in his day, but the common consensus is that the letters to Timothy and Titus were written during his final imprisonment, which was followed by his execution. So what we have here is a man nearing the end of his life and he’s flat out rejecting the Divinity of Christ. Yikes. And here we’ve spent hundreds of years exalting St. Paul when Scriptures strongly indicate that Paul ended up in Hell. See what happens when you start to think for yourself instead of just believing everything you’re told?

Anna Diehl, The Pursuit of God 15 Comments [1/24/2016 4:19:24 AM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 116277

[about how to respond to a teenaged son turning away from the faith; links and bold original]

Once you have put your fears into words, the next step is to identify the beliefs behind the fears. All fears are based on certain assumptions. Let’s look at the assumptions the [following] statements are making about God.

#1: I’m afraid that my son might not really be saved after all and that he might end up in Hell.

If souls spend their entire lives refusing to submit to Jesus as their God and Savior, they will certainly end up in Hell when they die–this is a very important truth that many of us try not to think about. But whenever we find God’s truths having an oppressive effect on us, it’s an indication that other false beliefs are getting added to the mix.

If we really understood God’s priorities, we wouldn’t think there is anything sad about souls ending up in Hell for an eternity. Hell is not a bummer to God, it’s a glorious thing. God will not be mocked. He delights in justice. He delights in revenge (see Why God Loves Hell). But while God thoroughly enjoys thrashing His enemies, He is also extremely gracious, kind, patient, and merciful. Before condemning us to Hell, God gives us plenty of chances to come to Him. He educates us about who He is and what He wants. He makes sure we have the internal resources we need to meet His demands for reverential submission (see The Salvation Process: Understanding the Fairness of God). If we really saw how incredibly gracious God is towards every soul and if we were really loving God first, then we would feel furious at seeing souls continue to spit in His face for their entire lives and we would celebrate their demise. Being aligned with God means caring about HIS feelings more than we care about the comfort of created things. Being loyal to God means wanting Him to be revered and honored by every human soul.

When the idea of a loved one ending up in Hell makes us feel burdened, sad, and miserable, what we’re often trying to do is one of two things: either we’re trying to share grief that we think God is feeling, or we are mourning for ourselves because we think the loss of our loved one will permanently cripple us. Neither of these things is true. God is not mourning when souls end up in Hell, and we aren’t going to spend eternity pining for the people who didn’t make it to Heaven. We were designed to be fully satisfied by our Creators in eternity. Relating with other created beings is going to be a nice extra, but relating to our Gods will be what really makes our souls feel complete. God has designed Heaven in such a way that you will not miss anyone who isn’t there. In the worst case scenario, if you ended up in Heaven but your child did not, you would not miss him at all. You would not be sad, you would not feel incomplete, you would not be haunted by memories from earth. God has taken care of all of these issues and He promises that for those who submit to Him on earth, Heaven will be a place of eternal joy. Your peace today will come from focusing on the fact that all is well between you and God. If your son is choosing to defy God, that’s something he needs to work out with the Holy Spirit.

#2: I’m afraid that my son is heading down a path that will make his life miserable. I’m afraid I won’t be able to deal with the heartache that will cause.

This fear assumes that your happiness in this life is dependent on teen’s current circumstances. If your son is sad, you must be sad. If he’s happy, you can be happy. Well, no, you are not dependent on your son. Being a good parent doesn’t mean you have to revolve around your teen and let him control your state of mind. God is your center in life, not your child. God is your all-sufficient Provider who is with you every day and guiding all of your steps. You never need to fear future trials, nor should you anticipate them. You just want to take one day at a time and focus on the fact that God is with you.

Your son is not alone in this universe with only you to guide him. God is your son’s true Father–you’re just a temporary caretaker who God has called in to be a witness for Him in your child’s life. It is an enormous privilege to be trusted with the care of another human soul, but God doesn’t just abandon you on the job. He is right there with you–guiding your steps, and leading you in the care of HIS soul. You don’t have to have all of the answers because you know the One who does. You don’t have to see into the future or be able to anticipate problems. If God wanted your teen to only have a perfect parent, He would have never gotten you or any other human guardian involved in your teen’s life. But it pleased God to have you–an imperfect, fallen human being–to work with Him as He raises HIS son. The pressure isn’t on you in this situation, it’s on God. God is the only One who can illuminate a soul with truth and give him a desire to do what is right. You can present your child with wisdom that God gives you, but you can’t reach into your child’s mind and make him value righteousness–that’s God’s job. You don’t want to try and take on God-sized responsibilities or you’ll end up feeling like a total failure.

#3: I’m afraid my son’s rebellion indicates I’m failing as a parent in some way. I’m afraid God is angry with me for not living up to His demands.

God doesn’t expect or want perfection from you. God wants your total submission. God wants you to ask Him to have His total way in your life, and then TRUST that He will. God is not going to dump a bunch of vague guilt trips on you. If there’s something specific He wants you to do or say in this situation, He will tell you. TRUST is the key here–you need to trust that your Father is good, kind, loving, and on your side. He is not going to let you miss His cues and then rage at you for failing. He is not going to demand things from you that He knows you don’t have. Every parent makes mistakes. All parents lose their tempers, make bad judgment calls, and do things that they wish they could undo. This is where you need to remember that God is gracious and He judges you by your soul’s desire to please Him.

Okay, so how should you pray for your teen during this time? You shouldn’t. You need to pray for yourself instead, because the fact that you’re stressing over this tells you there are weak points in your own trust. God is already taking the best possible care of your son, and He will continue to do so regardless of what advice you give Him. God doesn’t want you to tell Him how to do His job. He is already the perfect Father–you want to give Him room to work and honor Him with your trust in His goodness, wisdom, and methods.

Anna Deihl, Christian Post 20 Comments [1/24/2016 4:19:14 AM]
Fundie Index: 15
Submitted By: pyro

Quote# 116276

[For Christianity to state, openly, that homosexuals are sinful, and in the old testament that they should be put to death, clearly places Christianity in the similar realm of Nazism.]

Killing a gay as punishment for that behaviour is no more a Nazi tactic than killing a murderer for his offense.

etherealmeekle, Captain Cynic 14 Comments [1/24/2016 4:18:50 AM]
Fundie Index: 16
Submitted By: menomaru

Quote# 116274



Just before Thanksgiving, Obama announced he wanted to import what was most
likely to be thousands of Muslim terroritsts. Most states said "NO!"

Ben Garrison, grrrgraphics 28 Comments [1/23/2016 10:00:36 AM]
Fundie Index: 27
Submitted By: skybison
1 2 3 4 5 10 15 | top