Quote# 141584

JESUS THE SON OF TIBERIUS JULIUS PANTERA!!

BY GIVING HER SON THE LATIN NAME JESUS, IT ALSO SLANDERS THE VIRGIN MIRIAM BECAUSE
IT IMPLIES THAT SHE COMMITTED FORNICATION WITH TIBERIUS JULIUS PANTERA!!
About 600 years before the birth of the Messiah, the Prophet Isaiah made this great prediction:

Therefore JEHOVAH himself shall give you a sign; behold, a virgin (Heb. almah, Gr. parthenos) shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel (Isaiah 7:14).

The Prophet Micah predicted that the birthplace of Immanuel would be in Bethlehem:

But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall come forth unto me he that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting (Micah 5:2).

Daniel the Prophet gave the exact year when Shiloh would be manifested to Israel:

Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks (483 years): the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks (483) shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself. and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined (Daniel 9:25-26).

That great prophecy was fulfilled to the letter around 4 BC when the Messiah was born in Bethlehem.

And she (Miriam) brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room in the inn (St. Luke 2:7).

Lucifer the devil diligently studied those 3 great prophecies, and he was determined to either kill or create a counterfeit "Messiah." He almost succeeded when the Edomite tyrant King Herod ordered a massacre of all the babies in Bethlehem.

A statue and tombstone inscription of Tiberius Julius Pantera is in the Römerhalle Museum, in the land of Saint Martin Luther.

Satan the devil, in a mocking parody and counterfeit of the virgin birth, used a Roman soldier named Tiberius Julius Pantera to rape a young Jewish woman named Miriam.

Tiberius was stationed in Israel; he adopted the illegitimate son born to Miriam, and gave him the Latin name JESUS!!

During the ministry of the Messiah, the Satan possessed Pharisees constantly accused him of being illegitimate:

Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Miriam? and his brothers, Jacob, and Joseph, and Simeon, and Judah? (St. Matthew 13:55).

Is not this the carpenter, the son of Miriam, the brother of Jacob, and Joseph, and Judah, and Simeon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him (St. Mark 6:3).

And they said, is not this Jehoshua, the son of Joseph? Do we not know his father and mother? how is it then that he said, I came down from heaven? (St. John 6:42).

During the ministry of the Messiah, the Satan possessed Pharisees constantly accused him of being illegitimate:

Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Miriam? and his brothers, Jacob, and Joseph, and Simeon, and Judah? (St. Matthew 13:55).

Is not this the carpenter, the son of Miriam, the brother of Jacob, and Joseph, and Judah, and Simeon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him (St. Mark 6:3).

And they said, is not this Jehoshua, the son of Joseph? Do we not know his father and mother? how is it then that he said, I came down from heaven? (St. John 6:42)

In 313, Emperor Jesus Constantine made the change from Joshua to Jesus official

In 313, Emperor Jesus Constantine changed Romulus and Remus to Saints Peter and Paul, and he also made the change from Joshua to Jesus official.

Saint Paul—a Hebrews of the Hebrews—and a Roman citizen, planted Christianity so firmly on the Rock at Roma that it took centuries for the Great Apostasy to develop.

As the Apostasy slowly developed, images of baby Jesus in the arms of his mother appeared.

Concurrently, images of an effeminate-looking Jesus with long hair appeared.

The Babylonian Talmud teaches that Jesus was the son of Tiberius Julius Pantera!!

The Talmud (Hebrew: teaching) is a massive collection of the writings of the fake "Jews," beginning around 200 AD. Written in Hebrew, it includes commentaries on the Pentateuch and oral traditions passed down by the Babylonian "Jews" or Samaritans. It is also the official "bible" of the fake "Jews."

Scattered throughout that massive tome are many unmistakable references to Christianity and to a person named Jeshu ben Pandira or Jeshu the Nazarene.

Those fake "Jews," or Kosher Nostra, are just the spiritual descendants of the Pharisees, who were the deadly enemies of the Messiah during the 3.5-year ministry.

Patrick Scrivener, Reformation 1 Comments [12/20/2018 12:00:07 PM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Jacob Harrison

Quote# 141581

Lady Checkmate's headline: "Attack against CHRISTmas: 'Grinch' principal on leave after attempt to ban Christmas items from school"

(Lady Checkmate has cut-and-pasted this story from Fox News, link is here: https://www.foxnews.com/us/nebraska-principal-placed-on-leave-after-memo-banning-certain-christmas-decorations-causes-uproar )

Don't forget to RECOMMEND. Lets get the Truth out so that Light may shine bright in this dark place and Jesus Christ may be glorified. Even if the discussion is closed, please still RECOMMEND. May God bless you and keep you.

Mick Williams:
Only a dim would say candy canes are shaped J for Jesus. Actually, they started out straight, but were later bent to represent a shepherd's staff.

Lady Checkmate:
true. Lol, I love that you know that!

Mick Williams:
It's amazing how these people spout opinions without doing a little research. We call that liberal logic: their opinion trumps our facts.

Lady Checkmate/Mick Williams, Disqus - Faith & Religion 6 Comments [12/20/2018 11:42:05 AM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: Jocasta

Quote# 141578

Race, religion still rallying cries in ‘New Malaysia’

Ethno-nationalist opposition forces have pressed PM Mahathir Mohamad to backtrack on a commitment to end all forms of racial discrimination as the nation's ethnic politics intensify

Tens of thousands of Malay Muslims took to the streets of Kuala Lumpur on December 8 to oppose Malaysia’s adoption of a United Nations (UN) convention against racial discrimination amid fears that privileges enjoyed by the Malay majority and Islam’s status as the country’s official religion would be threatened.

When Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad addressed the UN General Assembly in September, he pledged that Malaysia would ratify all remaining core UN instruments related to the protection of human rights, including the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).

Although the nonagenarian premier admitted that ratification “would not be easy” owing to acute sensitives around race and religion in Muslim-majority Malaysia, the pledge was hailed both at home and abroad as an indication of the new Pakatan Harapan government’s commitment to human rights, reform and democratization.

Conservative ethno-nationalist and Islamist opposition parties, however, furiously took aim at the treaty and alleged, contrary to the facts, that it would threaten the special position of Malay Muslims, who account for around 60% of the population and are granted special status as bumiputera, or “sons of the soil”, in Article 153 of the country’s constitution.

After weeks of pressure by pro-Malay groups, the Mahathir-led Harapan government changed course, announcing in late November that it would not ratify ICERD. Saturday’s rally was originally intended as a protest against Harapan’s ratification plans but went ahead anyway despite the government backtracking on its earlier commitment to sign the treaty.

Seven months after the electoral defeat of the long-ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition – an event some heralded as the beginning of a “New Malaysia” – the country’s new multi-ethnic government is staring down the old specter of race-based politics as right-wing opposition parties double down on efforts to win over the Malay majority.

Organized by a coalition of Malay Muslim groups, Saturday’s rally was attended by leaders of the former ruling party, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO), and Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS), both of which urged Malays to unite in a bid to recapture political power after their failure to win May’s general election.

“If Islam is disturbed, if the [Malay] race is disturbed, if our rights are disturbed, then we will rise to defend our rights,” UMNO president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi told rally-goers. Former Prime Minister Najib Razak and his wife, Rosmah Mansor, also participated in the rally; both face criminal charges for corruption and graft that could soon see them jailed.

A sea of UMNO and PAS supporters dressed in white converged on the capital’s Merdeka Square for afternoon prayers, holding up placards demanding protection of their rights to chants of “Allahu akbar” (“God is great”) and “Tolak ICERD” (“Reject ICERD”). Citing police estimates, media reported 55,000 participants attended the rally.

Other local media reports claimed a large segment of rally participants traveled by bus to Kuala Lumpur from PAS’ northeastern strongholds of Kelantan and Terengganu. Ahead of the mass gathering, neighboring Singapore issued a rare travel advisory to its citizens citing a “possibility that limited and isolated skirmishes might take place.”

While the rally was peaceful from start to finish, racially charged riots broke out days earlier on November 26 over the planned relocation of a Hindu temple on the outskirts of Kuala Lumpur for a property development, which saw vehicles torched and people injured in the ensuing fight. Dozens have been detained in connection with the riot.

Mahathir described the incident as “criminal” and having nothing to do with race or religion, while government ministers said exploiting the issue could incite further social unrest. With right-wing opposition parties fanning perceptions that the Malay Muslim community is under siege, race relations in the multi-ethnic nation are again on edge.

After deadly Chinese-Malay riots in 1969, race-based affirmative action policies, known as the New Economic Policy, were introduced that granted Malays preference over affordable housing, university scholarships and government contracts in a bid to eliminate poverty. Now, many in the Malay community apparently believe ICERD would imperil those decades-old Malay majority-favoring policies.

Dennis Ignatius, a veteran Malaysian diplomat, described ICERD in a recent article as “an aspirational convention rather than a binding treaty” in which signatories are given “wide leeway to carve out for themselves exceptions to satisfy their own local laws,” a reference to the constitutional special position enjoyed by Malays.

ICERD, in fact, allows race-based affirmative action, though the treaty stipulates that such measures “should not continue once the objective is achieved.” Countries are, however, allowed to ratify the treaty with reservations to ensure national laws are not superseded. Malaysia and Brunei are the only Muslim majority countries not to have ratified ICERD.

“ICERD has, undoubtedly, dealt a serious political blow to the [Harapan] government” and has also “allowed UMNO-PAS to burnish their credentials as the preeminent defender of all things Malay,” Ignatius wrote, adding that the government had “failed to agree on a game plan to manage the ratification process once it committed itself to doing so.”

Ignatius believes the issue has put Harapan on the defensive, giving UMNO and PAS an opportunity to “claw back some of the political power it lost at the ballot box.” As the two largest Malay parties collude to rebuild support and widen their political base, they could now “strongly influence national policies without even being in the Cabinet,” he argued.

The December 8 rally proves Malaysia’s opposition can mobilize supporters in their tens of thousands, a show of force that could put Harapan on its heels even as it grants concessions like pulling back from ICERD ratification amid plans to retain affirmative policies that critics have consistently argued are overdue for reform.

UMNO and PAS “forced the government to back down on ICERD and seized control of the [Malay] rights narrative, yet at the same time, the question feels unsettled,” says Amrita Malhi, a visiting fellow at the Australian National University’s College of Asia and the Pacific. “They achieved mixed results,” she believes.

Both parties have yet to formalize their alliance and aim to “demonstrate to the other that it is the stronger of the two,” she says of UMNO and PAS. “Malay Muslim sentiment remains divided and there is plainly still a fair amount of goodwill for the government, which I expect will begin investing in a counter-narrative to contest the way PAS and UMNO are framing the rights question.”

The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) held a pro-ICERD event on December 9 attended by around 500 people. Mahathir was scheduled to attend but distanced himself from the event at a press conference a day earlier, explaining that his government chose to take a different stand on ratification.

While human rights activists surely regret the government changing course on racial discrimination, some see a silver lining in the anti-ICERD camp being able to exercise their right to freedom of assembly peacefully without harassment from police and authorities, proof that Mahathir’s “New Malaysia” is delivering the more open society it promised.

Several Malaysian organizations, Asia Times 0 Comments [12/20/2018 11:41:24 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 141574

I am POSITIVE that God would not allow a Catholic Church to guard the Ark....

NTEB [MOD], Now The End Begins 7 Comments [12/20/2018 11:08:55 AM]
Fundie Index: 0

Quote# 141572

"These prophecies were kept by priests who were the descendants of those Jews who were held captive by the Babylonians, and who had migrated from Babylon to distant lands where 'the kings of the East' dwelt. This is a clear reference to the lands of the Far East, possibly India, Tibet, or China. When these clerics reached an area chosen by God, they were instructed by Him to build a temple dedicated to His glory and to house these prophecies until the time of 'the one who held the words and ways of Isaac and Ishmael.' My parents, who are devout Christians, are of Jewish and Arabic origins, and they believe this is in clear referral to someone who is the descendant of both these races.

"The fascinating thing about this is the location of this temple, which in these writings is said to exist nowhere and everywhere and can only be seen by mortal eyes for 50 days every 50 years and in a different location. The priests are said to have been afforded extraordinarily long life and are much like the warrior monks of Tibetan and Shaolin backgrounds. This temple is said to be further protected by a legion of angelic warriors.

"Needless to say, the location and how to find this temple, if it truly exists, is an endeavor for which my parents have put a considerable amount of scholarly and financial resources into and in the process they have uncovered many things once thought lost, legend, or exaggerations of the truth. One of these is the existence of Atlantis, Lemuria, and other lands thought to be myths."

Without any pretense or deception in him, Jonathan continued, "During the time of Daniel, they had access to records that are now lost to antiquity, but these scrolls and parchments describe accurately the locations of these lands, along with star charts that correlate exactly the positions of stars and constellations, solar and lunar eclipses, and other celestial phenomena that have been verified with 100% accuracy. The details of these writings are far too numerous to go into detail during this lecture, and the contents will be published in several weeks from now. It is necessary to say that the words of the Old and New Testament are unequivocally and without a doubt factual. These scrolls contain the proof and reasons for the Great Flood which decimated the planet and changed the entire biosphere and geography of the planet. It also sets the age of this world to be no older than 12,000 years, give or take a few centuries.

Minister R. A. Artis, The Celestial Knights: the Advent of Go’El, the Avenger of God (book) 2 Comments [12/20/2018 11:08:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Denizen

Quote# 141566

Perhaps you haven't read Leviticus - where God tells us about how He destroyed Aaron's two sons for doing the exact same thing you are doing every Dec. 25. God says they offered Him "strange fire" - and says it was something that He "commanded them not". So for that He sent fire from Heaven and killed them both on the spot - for trying to worship Him in a way that He had not commanded them to.
.
As well .....
.
Okay - let's look at this in truth and spirit:
.
God makes it clear that no liar shall enter Heaven. He also makes clear that anyone who brings harm to one of His precious children, it would be better for a millstone to be hung around their neck and tossed into the sea.
.
Okay - with that in mind - what is the very first lie told to an infant/child? The "santa/xmas" lie, correct? And who is the one who tells that child that very first lie? Their parents.
.
So do you think that God is okay with a "tradition" of ours that is responsible for the very first LIE told to one of His precious children?
.
Those children get older - they find out - or are told - that their parents have lied to them the moment they were born - then when that same parent tries to tell them about Jesus and God's Holy Written Word - do you not think that the child will doubt/question whether their parent is lying to them again?
Do you honestly believe that God is up there thinking "Hmmm - well, I know what I said about the whole "lying" thing - and about not bringing harm to one of my precious children .... but - okay, I get it - yall are lying to one of my precious children to keep them happy - to make them smiles with all sorts of goodies up under a tree - I know I mentioned in my Word that I didn't want yall cutting down a tree and decking it in silver and gold, yeah, I said that didn't I - but hey, since it's all for the kiddies - and their happiness ... I guess I can let that lying thing slide - and the tree part too- and the bringing harm to my precious children."
.
So see - that is exactly how Satan has successfully gotten his foothold in from the very beginning of these babies/children's little minds - AND created division between that parent and child - right from the start.
.
As well - xmas supports, causes or advocates for just about every single SIN mentioned in God's Holy Word. Do you think He is okay with xmas now?
.
Lying
Coverting
Jealousy
Gluttony
Debt
Sexual sin
Stealing
Murder
Vanity
Greed
Idolatry
Adultery
Blasphemy (against Him)
Lust
Cursing
Drinking excessively/drunkeness
Envy
Anger
Depression (not a sin but still not a good thing)
Sadness (not a sin but still not a good thing)
Stirring up family fights
Proud eyes
Pride
Hatred
Wrath
Sorcery (magic reindeer, santa, etc)
Selfishness
Slothfulness
Disobedience to God
Accusing
Arguing
Arrogance
Bitterness
Boasting
Deception
Sowing discord
Complaining
Contempt
Not being content with what you have
Contention/strife
Defrauding others
Flattering for gain
Gambling
Begrudging
Graven images
Malice
Rioting (Black Friday mayhem)
Slander
Backbiters
Quick tempered
Ungrateful
ETC ETC ETC?

Jane Dough, Youtube 3 Comments [12/20/2018 11:07:34 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Christopher

Quote# 141565

John Paul Thomas: I quit celebrating Christmas for the first time this year, after 33 years. I tried to explain to family and friends that Christmas is NOT Christian but they all look at me like I'm nuts. However it's good to know that there are still some true Christians out there who take biblical scripture seriously. "...Let GOD be true and every man a liar..."(Romans 3:4). Its high time we unlearn the lies and seek the truth as satan is the father of all lies, and only the truth can set us free.?

Maria Tereza Ferreira: John Paul Thomas unfortunately my Christian friends prefer to go along with Satan's numerous lies too. I've told them over & over that they are not worshipping God by celebrating Xmas but they too prefer to look the other way. I will not be part of these rituals because that is what it is. God bless you for sticking to the truth?

John Paul Thomas & Maria Tereza Ferreira, Youtube 5 Comments [12/20/2018 11:07:23 AM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: Christopher

Quote# 141564

(=This is an example of Anti Christmas fundies =)
You know when something is wrong when the world celebrate what is supposed to be a Christian celebration. The world do not want anything to do with Christ?


Mike A, Youtube 4 Comments [12/20/2018 11:07:14 AM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: Christopher

Quote# 141562

La Tierra plana es el movimiento intelectual y cultural que existe debido a la inexistencia del movimiento de la tierra.
#ResearchFlatEarth #EarthIsFlat

English: Flat Earth is the intellectual and cultural movement that exists due to the nonexistence of the Earth's movement.
#ResearchFlatEarth #EarthIsFlat

Geocéntrico, Twitter 9 Comments [12/19/2018 11:17:07 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 141560

Your options are:

Nukes.

Invasion.

Sharia.

Civil war.

In any case your solution needs to be extreme to effect a change of the kind of magnitude needed to cleanse a society too far gone.

The level of response needed to course correct a society is exponentially related to how deviant and degenerate it is. That's why if you see the warning signs early and have enough power and influence, you can nip the cancer in the bud. Or, if you're the mastermind behind the degeneracy, all you need to do is to make it worse just bit by bit to make it harder and harder to fight and fix it.

We're past the event horizon, however. There is no fixing this. Humanity needs a hard reset in the form of an extreme solution. If you want things to change for the better, then you must start with a fresh slate.

Since I have no power to effect real change, I will sit back and watch it all slowly decay and then eventually burn when the populace reaches critical mass and the societal bucket cannot hold any more droplets of degeneracy.

based_meme, r/Braincels 11 Comments [12/19/2018 11:16:44 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 141559

Fun fact: all users on the right are actual IT members except the bottom guy.

It is so ironic when someone who wants to chop of his working body organ and fetishize full body spandex calls others out for being mentally ill.

Like the sheer irony of it makes me question how can those fucks even for a second think they are even remotely right.

Which is why I think they make it a point to highlight the .01% of the posts of the outlandish retardedcels who say they support rape and murdering of jews.

Cause if IT even for a second considers the actual Incel content instead of the retarded non-sense that most of the times they post themselves for their upboats and soylent medals ,they have no arguments and no logic left on their side.

The old saying actual crazy people will never think they are crazy or question their sanity. That pretty much explains a lot of these insane fucks you see REEEEing today.

I think that might be true for the actually crazy ones, But in general a normal person would realize and see what is crazy.

Which makes it worse for them when compared to us cause we call out the pedos and nazis cause we still know what is wrong. While they will never call out a tranny who wants to cut of working body parts or a cuck for being an enabler. It doesn't take that much brain capacity to figure out being single mothers is almost always a choice and a bad one and you cannot demonize some one for not dating them.

Or calling out someone who wants to make permanent body damamging changes to a 12 year old by those disgusting hormonal treatments and all that garbage. There is a reason we don't allow teenagers to drive cars or vote or provide consent.

Which they agree with but all of that goes out the window as soon as it comes to trannies, Like really? Suddenly a person who isn't allowed to drive can make a life altering decision. It honestly makes me so angry. I have nothing against trannies do whatever you want but leave kids out of it and the normalizing of dangerous body changing procedures to remove healthy organs.

Cause it is like a spitting distance away from lobotomy.

Trannies are what's in fashion for the liberal group think hive mind so of course logic has to go out the door or else they will be cast away from their tribe if they dare speak against children wanting to cut their dicks off.

Humans are just a stupid monkey deep down and we will throw any logic out the door if that means most of us can fit into whatever dumb fucking tribe we feel we belong to.

When my sister Was around 13-4 she said she hated kids and never wants to have any of her own. according to their logic she should be allowed to get a hysteractomy

I mean the logic is the same right? And trannies can't reproduce either. So why not just allow everyone to remove and do what they want.

I know a 10 year old who would like to remove his kidney and sell it for a gaming pc. or this Emo kid who wants to insert metal rods inside his body to look more emo.

Why not let them all do what they want. Cause we let childrens feelings decide what is correct and what isn't.

And by that logic pedophilia can also be justified why not legalize it. I am sure there are 14-5 year old chicks who are willing to sleep with 70 year old geezers. Why not let them do what they want. Liberals make me sick.

I don't understand how those guys even dare to call themselves the better ones

I mean, there is a whole branch of feminism (TERFs) that is against trans people because they see us as oppressive to women somehow. Most of the current anti-trans backlash is coming from radical feminists. Feminists come up with most of the memes and arguments that the alt right ends up using. IT happens to be pro-trans but that could change at any time. tbh I think the trans movement fits better on the manosphere side of things rather than the SJW side. I have gender dysphoria and it's the main reason I'm an incel.

I have nothing agains trans people. Do what you want. I have problems when it comes to mutilation of children or even adults for that matter. Carving up body parts cause you feel like it is not good especially for children which is why I am also against circumcision.

OpenForDebatePMME, r/Braincels 13 Comments [12/19/2018 11:16:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 141556

Which Came First, Feminism Or Sin?

I've noticed that most people, men and women included, tend to be biased either more toward men or women when it comes to the battle between the sexes. I tend to be biased toward men only because sin, rebellion and indifference always exist together. Did America become wicked because of feminism, or did feminism happen because of our wickedness? Which came first, the chicken or the egg? The answer is the chicken. God created all the animals first in Genesis and then they reproduced. Concerning feminism, it came first. Eve desired EQUALITY with God. The serpent told Eve that she and Adam would become “as gods” if they ate the forbidden fruit in the Garden Of Eden. The serpent (Satan, Revelation 20:2) didn't say that Eve would be greater than God; but rather, equal with God. So the root cause of Eve's sin was the philosophy of feminism, desiring to be EQUAL with God's authority.

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Savior 17 Comments [12/19/2018 11:15:23 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 141554


(In response to this story on Christian News Network which incorrectly labels a synapsid as a mammal: https://christiannews.net/2018/12/04/discovery-of-giant-synapsid-fossil-in-poland-throws-a-wrench-in-evolutionary-expectations-for-triassic-layers/ )

edwitness:
"Note that these ancestors of mammals possesed both mammalian and reptilian characteristics and confirm evolution. These creatures were not mammals."
This is a worldview statement. Not a scientific one.
Because for those whose worldview includes a Creator, this evidence does not speak of evolution. But instead proves they have a common designer. The Creator who made all that has been made who is introduced to us in Genesis.

Richard Forrest:
Nonsense. It's a scientific one which has nothing to do with "worldview".
It's a statement made in the light of the evidence.

edwitness:
Wrong. As shown the evidence only reveals to us that the animal lived. The rest of the beliefs the evolutionist comes to are from his worldview. Not the scientific method.

Richard Forrest:
The evidence also shows that it's a synapsid and not a mammal. It also shows that it lived in the Triassic period. That is what has been established by applying to the scientific method to the evidence.
You don't get to redefine what is and what is not science because the findings of science contradict your shoddy religious dogma. That is downright dishonest.

edwitness:
What is dishonest is saying that the scientific method is whatever you need it to be to make what is not evidence for your worldview become evidence. The scientific method is observable and repeatable. Without that it's just speculation. And in your case it is speculation built on a designer-less worldview.

Richard Forrest:
I'm sure that others will see the irony here. You are asserting that saying the scientific method is whatever you need it to be is dishonest, and in the same post attempting to redefine the scientific method because it contradicts your religious dogma.
Get an education. There are numerous sources out there which explain the scientific method in detail. Creationist sources are not reliable when it comes to how science is defined.
You are making yourself look both ridiculous and dishonest. If you are so deluded that you think that such an exhibition will convince anyone to join your cause, I pity you.

edwitness:
"Creationist sources are not reliable when it comes to how science is defined."
Really? They went to the same schools and received the same degrees in science that all the evolutionists went to. They know science as well, and I would contend better, than evolutionists. In fact, most of them at one time believed in evolution. But, because the evidence was not there to support it, as all the evolution scientists I gave the quotes from admitted, they rejected the lie that is evolution for the truth that the Creator God made all that has been made. Just as the evidence supports.
The irony here is that you reject the scientific method because it does not support your worldview. While claiming that while I am appealing to the scientific method, that is for our conclusions to be both observable and repeatable, I am doing this.
Unless you can observe evolution and repeat it through testing it can not be considered scientific. Which means it is a belief system built on a worldview that rejects the notion of a designer.

Richard Forrest:
Well, as we have observed evolution - using the term in the sense for which it was coined by the people who coined it - ?in action in the natural world and replicate it in the laboratory, it qualifies as science even by your incorrect definition.
As for creationists knowing science better than "evolutionists", if that were the case why do they lie about science - as Purdom has done in the article in referring to the Triassic synapsid as a mammal? Or do you not care if creationists lie provided they tell you what you want to hear.
Oh, and by the way: very, very few creationists have any qualifications in evolutionary biology, and the very small number who do reject the science on the basis of their religious beliefs. not the evidence.
Science does not reject the notion of a designer. It does not accept assertions not supported by evidence. None of the supposed evidence for a designer stands up to empirical scrutiny.

edwitness:
"Well, as we have observed evolution..."
But, that's just it. No one has ever observed evolution. No one has ever seen a lizard lay an egg and a bird fly out. Just as no one has ever observed a cat over millions of years change into a dog. Because it does not happen.
"Science does not reject the notion of a designer. It does not accept assertions not supported by evidence."
Real science is observable. Therefore evolution can not be considered Science. So it is evolution, and not science, that rejects the evidence that points to a designer. The Creator, Jesus Christ.
For example, no one doubts the monument at Mt. Rushmore is the work of an intelligent designer, yet much greater design and laws in the universe are overlooked, or disregarded, by people who believe that evolution produced everything in existence, with no intelligence or design behind it.
This makes no sense.
History tells us Gutzon Borglum was the designer of the Mount Rushmore National Memorial; the Bible tells us God is the Designer of the universe, and man was made (designed) in his image (Genesis 1:26).

Richard Forrest:
"But, that's just it. No one has ever observed evolution."
Well, the scientists who study the subject can refer to numerous observed instance of evolution in action. What do you know that they don't?
"No one has ever seen a lizard lay an egg and a bird fly out. Just as no one has ever observed a cat over millions of years change into a dog. Because it does not happen."
Quite so, and if it did it would utterly falsify evolutionary theory. I suggest that you educate yourself in the subject to that you don't make a fool of yourself by displaying such utter ignorance of what you are writing about.

edwitness:
Punctuated equilibrium, one of the novel ideas evolutionists have come to because they are constantly trying to put fingers in the dike as new archeaological finds refute old thinking, states just that.
So maybe it is you that needs to research your religion so you can see just how foolish it is. And how foolish you are to believe it.

Richard Forrest:
"Punctuated equilibrium, one of the novel ideas evolutionists have come to because they are constantly trying to put fingers in the dike as new archeaological finds refute old thinking, states just that."
You are once again demonstrating only utter ignorance! Try reading Gould's account of the theory he formulated with Eldridge rather than relying on creationist sources. Oh and by the way: it's palaeontologists who work on the fossil record, not archaeologists.
Perhaps you should take your own advice and do some research into the nature of evolution. Not that you will, because your religious beliefs are so fragile that you need to maintain ignorance.

edwitness:
Punctuated equilibrium means exactly what I have stated. If you are going to be dishonest about your own beliefs then what is the point of continuing this conversation? The goal posts are set. It is for you to show evidence for the touchdown you believe your scientists have made. And for me to show you how they have not.
My job is easy. Because all the evidence supports it.

Richard Forrest:
"Punctuated equilibrium means exactly what I have stated."
Not according to Gould and Eldridge who formulated the theory. You can find their original paper on the internet. Try reading it. If you do - and I can confidently say that you won't - you'll find that the creationist sources from which you gleaned your caricature of that theory are at best ignorant, at worst lying. But of course you won't because your religious dogma demands ignorance of its adherents.
As for research into the nature of evolution: I have carried out original research and published in scientific journals. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that I know more about the subject than you do.

edwitness, Christian News Network 9 Comments [12/19/2018 11:14:42 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Jocasta

Quote# 141553

How does using a transgender person's preferred pronouns fuck up someone's education? If a teacher is constantly misgendering a student then it's going to cause issues for said student. Teachers aren't there to cause students problems and have a say on someone's identity. If I work in retail I can't call a problem customer a cunt because it's against the store policy, misgendering was against the schools policy.

Who says a person is free to determine their own pronouns when it comes to something as basic as gender? Who says anyone should expect someone else use the "right" pronouns when addressing them? Who says demanding they do so is reasonable? Who says "misgendering" is even a valid concept?

With no other group of people do I have to check with each individual person before I talk to them to avoid committing a sin. So no, I'm not doing it for pushy, passive aggressive (or sometimes outright aggressive... very feminine, by the way) trannies no matter how miserable they claim it makes them. It is not the purpose of pronouns to help reinforce someone's self-image or their sense of identity. It never has been the purpose, and it's not going to become the purpose because a bunch of outliers with unusual conditions (and their self-righteous "allies") want it. Fuck that. And fuck trying to force it on society by forcing public servants to do it.

And if they just can't accept that, they can follow through on their constant self-pitying claims of abject misery and kill themselves. If it will stop them from constantly making everyone else's lives miserable, and if it will mean nobody's speech is being compelled, then the world wins out on that bargain. There are so few of them damn near nobody will notice if they're gone. They need to recognize that.

frozenrunner, Kiwi Farms 8 Comments [12/19/2018 11:14:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 141552

Please explain how the Universe came into being. Tell me what caused the Universe to exist? After that, tell me if you are in favor of cancer research, or support do you support feeding and clothing the hungry? If you do, you're a hypocrite. You are interrupting Evolution. As a Christian, I fully support medical research, and feeding and clothing people in need, because I believe that God created everything, and He tells us to have compassion for our fellow human beings. Not that I understand everything, but to assume that if you do not understand the "why" of certain situations, it can't be true, is the height of hubris. In doing so, you attempt to bring God down to the level of humans. God is Supernatural. He is separate from His Creation, but intimately involved in His Creation. His reasons are beyond our understanding.

Bob Jones, Christian News Network 20 Comments [12/19/2018 11:14:13 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 141551

This comment is nonsensical anyway.

First, from any standpoint, if there is a God, then He is eternal and cannot die. That's just part of the definition. He won't be much of a God if he can die (spiritually).
Second, if there is not a God, then He can't die, since He never lived. You can't die if you never were.
Third, there is a God, and He is eternal, so He cannot die. So God is NOT dead.
Fourth, the closest that God came to death was when God the Son died on the cross for our sins, but only His body died, not His being, and we all know what happened and the resurrection and so on.
Fifth, if one means like a fad, that is impossible too. Some may become atheists, but all will not.

But now this guy is dead, and he knows that he was wrong.

Lydia Church, Christian News Network 10 Comments [12/19/2018 11:14:06 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Bob J

Quote# 141550

The evidence for the verasity of the KJV Bible we hold in our hands being the same Bible that was written by the 66 writers over thousands of years is rock solid. Any that would attempt to say otherwise base it on a pre conceived notion that Jesus is not the Messiah. And not any scholarly criticism.
For example, the book of Isaiah found in the Dead Sea scrolls is 1000 years older than the texts that were used to translate the KJV. And there is virtually no difference between the two. And certainly no difference that would prove the Bible we hold today is corrupted so that we can not know the truth of man's need for salvation. And Jesus' fulfilling that need.
Man could not do this. Only God could. More proof of His divine authorship.

edwitness, Christian News Network 11 Comments [12/19/2018 11:13:34 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Bob J

Quote# 141549

The devil does not want the lost to get saved.
The devil is behind all anger against this missionary event.
Other missionaries have gone out to isolated peoples and they got saved,
and all was well. Even if someone did not survive a disease, better to
die after a chance of hearing the gospel, than to live out your whole life
without it.
Genocide is keeping the gospel from them, and it's eternal genocide.
EVERYONE NEEDS TO GET SAVED, SO EVERYONE NEEDS TO HEAR THE GOSPEL.
It matters not whether or not you agree with the above statement.
We obey the Lord Jesus Christ above all else.

Lydia Church, Christian News Network 8 Comments [12/19/2018 11:13:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Bob J

Quote# 141548

Lady Checkmate's headline: "LATEST PERVERSE DEMAND: Making Pedophilia Respectable By ROD DREHER"

Making Pedophilia Respectable
By ROD DREHER • December 5, 2018, 1:27 PM
Thomas O’Carroll, convicted pedophile, pedophilia advocate
I hope you’re sitting down for this. Thomas O’Carroll, a convicted British pedophile, has published an essay in a peer-reviewed academic quarterly arguing for legalized pedophilia. Justin Lee writes about the situation in his Arc Digital column. Excerpts:
At 73 years old, O’Carroll has long been a bogeyman for both the left and the right?—?not to mention the children he has violated. To the right, he’s the perfect condensed symbol for the Sexual Revolution’s true telos?—?the nihilistic destructuring of human relations. To the left, he’s an albatross, a useful idiot for conservatives intent on establishing a link between homosexuality and pedophilia. He’s also a testament to the degraded standards of interdisciplinary scholarship.
His Sexuality & Culture article, which reads like the senior thesis of a bright-enough undergraduate edgelord majoring in philosophy, attempts to make the case that virtue ethics fails to provide a convincing justification for rejecting sex between adults and children. Moreover, he argues that in an ideal world, virtue would be understood in such a way as to include such practices and even celebrate them.
Lee pulls this quote from O’Carroll’s paper. Remember, this is O’Carroll writing, not Lee. Lee has highlighted a part of the passage:
The assertion that children are incapable of reciprocal sexual relations is empirically unfounded. Where is the evidence? A comparison with animals is again suggested. Dogs appear to be perfectly capable of reciprocity in loving relationships with human beings, often to the extent of being every bit as devoted and loyal in their affections towards their owners as their owners are towards them, and perhaps even more so. Again, even the personhood-restricting Scruton has acknowledged this (Scruton 2013, 2014). Dogs may lack a sophisticated appreciation of the other’s “intentionality”, on which Scruton sets so much store as a qualifying criterion of moral agency within sexual relations, but this appears to be no barrier to reciprocity in what many would consider to be its morally essential features. There should be mutual affection and attention to the other’s wishes. What else is needed, really? It may be thought this analogy is insufficiently close because dogs are not sexual partners of their human masters. But they can be. Dogs are not shy about expressing sexual interest in humans, and when their owner reciprocates that interest a sexual (and loving) relationship may develop, as has been attested in Dearest Pet, a book by Dutch controversialist (and children’s writer!) Midas Dekkers, and endorsed in a review by philosopher Peter Singer (Dekkers 2000; Singer 2001). (emphasis mine)
Got that? O’Carroll says that because bestiality is permissible, so too is pedophilia. Lee summarizes:
This question-begging dismissal of intentionality serves a dark purpose: the banishment of “consent” as a relevant category of concern. Consent, after all, is predicated upon intentionality. This is much too reminiscent of Peter Singer’s argument for bestiality, which can be summarized thusly: We eat animals without their consent, so why not screw them? Children, especially young children, consent to little of what we subject them to, so why shouldn’t we let O’Carroll bugger babies?
—————————————————————
IS ANYONE ELSE OUTRAGED??

(irrelevant scripture removed)

I've been saying for years that their goal is to legalize child-rape, but we must resist their perversity.

Don't forget to RECOMMEND. Lets get the Truth out so that Light may shine bright in this dark place and Jesus Christ may be glorified. Even if the discussion is closed, please still RECOMMEND. May God bless you and keep you.


Lady Checkmate, Disqus - Faith & Religion 5 Comments [12/19/2018 11:13:18 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Jocasta

Quote# 141547

Religious fakes who are sodomites predominate. Jim Bakker, PTL televangelist disgraced and defrocked for sexually abusing church secretary Jessica Hahn, actually preferred young boys. He frequently had young homo staffers go swimming nude with he and his top aides. Like Bakker, Assembly of God television preacher Jimmy Swaggert also was a sexual deviant-reportedly into porno literature, trampy prostitutes, etc. He stayed away from real sex with real women-desired bizarre acts.

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Savior 8 Comments [12/19/2018 11:13:09 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 141545

(Keep in mind, Jesse Lee Patterson is black.)

Right-wing commentator Jesse Lee Peterson told radio listeners this morning that black people use to be “moral people” before the civil rights era, but have become “immoral” since gaining more equal treatment in American society.

On his radio show this morning, a caller asked Peterson to elaborate on earlier claims he made about interracial children, when he asserted that having children with white people would “make blacks better.” The caller asked Peterson how mixed children “back in the slavery days” bettered themselves, to which Peterson answered that those children were able to achieve success because “they were not told they were victims, they were not told that white people were trying to hold them back.”

“Black people were moral people back then and they are immoral now. Since the civil rights movement, they have been relying on the government, they feel like victims, they blame everybody else for their weakness,” Peterson said.

Peterson is occasionally drafted to be a pundit in mainstream right-wing media to criticize the black community and to give cover for Republican scandals involving racism.

Jesse Lee Patterson, Right Wing Watch 7 Comments [12/19/2018 11:12:45 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Kuyohashi

Quote# 141543

I am a flat earther.

The Earth is a flat disc surrounded by a dome. The other planets and stuff are round. The Sun and moon move in circles above the Earth, but they aren't as big or far away as people say they are. If you go far enough in Antarctica, you will encounter a giant ice wall keeping you from the edge. That's why God made Antarctica so cold and uninhabitable. He doesn't want people reaching the edge.

Also, either:

A. The moon landing never happened.

Or

B. They made it to the moon (in less than 4 days), saw it was much smaller than they thought, and turned back.

The moon landing footage we saw was staged.

The government lies to us about this because they hate God. If they can "prove" something the Bible says is false, people will think God is a made up fairytale.

Crazy_Curtice, Reddit 14 Comments [12/19/2018 11:12:23 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 141541

JoKing: I don't subscribe to your caricature of theistic evolution.
Taking the account of the Fall as a true, allegorical, interpretation of the event, gives us the Fall, human sin and sinfulness, and the role of a Saviour. No problem.
You see, you cannot think my thoughts for me.

Martin: You can't have something that is true and allegorical at the same time. And no, you haven't solved the problem.

JoKing: You can. I have, along with many others, better educated than you and I, and humbler too..

Martin: No you can't, either the Fall is a real historical event or there is no reason for sin and judgement. Your theology fails.

JoKing: Historical, but not literal, expressed in allegorical language.

Martin: Rubbish. You're simply trying to avoid the obvious conclusion that Genesis records the events.

Martin, Premier 10 Comments [12/19/2018 11:11:52 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: I

Quote# 141540

Why do atheistic evolutionists conclude that Christianity is false? Basically, they rely on the following argument.

The Atheistic Evolutionist Argument
1) If evolution is true, there was no first, historical Adam.
2) If there was no first, historical Adam, there was no Fall.
3) If there was no Fall, the sinful condition of humanity is not an inescapable condition.
4) If the sinful condition is not an inescapable condition, moral and religious categories like ‘sin’ and ‘salvation’ are irrelevant or unnecessary, as evolution will take whatever course it takes by chance].
5) If salvation is irrelevant or unnecessary, there is no need for a Saviour.
6) The heart or fundamental claim of Christianity is that it is necessary for Jesus to come as the Saviour of the human race
Conclusion: If evolution is true [i.e. there was no historical Adam], then based on (5) and (6), Christianity is false.


The Theistic Evolutionist’s Blocking Strategy

The theistic evolutionist may try to block the atheistic evolutionist’s conclusion by arguing that even though we cannot solve the mystery of the origin of evil (however defined in evolutionary language), nevertheless, it is an undeniable empirical observation that ALL humans are born in ‘sin’. The need for a Saviour remains.
Unfortunately, for the theistic evolutionist – If God used the evolutionary process to create what appears to be a ‘sinful’ world, the absence of a Fall would suggest that God himself is solely responsible for the sinful condition of this world.

This disturbing conclusion should sober up many ‘progressive’ Christians who adopt theistic evolution along with the denial of a historical Fall of Adam, as any doubt about the goodness of God is fatal to the truth claim of Christianity.
For this reason, evangelical Christians insist on the doctrine of the historical and historic Fall of Adam as it preserves the insight that sin is an act of human free will, with the consequence of death to the human race. Sin is both universal (the sinful condition of humanity) and personal (it is my sin). The Fall is the reason why it is necessary for
a sinless, Second Adam to save the world through His death and resurrection.

Raptor, Premier 11 Comments [12/19/2018 11:11:32 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: I

Quote# 141539

In our present hedonistic society, I would not be surprised if huge numbers of the population were closeted homos. The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah did not get that way because of some genetic predisposition--it was a learned behavior.

Next time someone brings up the foolish fables and myths of Christianity, maybe I'll remind them that it is the last bulwark against the growing tide of immorality in this effeminate society we call progressive. Put that on your dollar menu!

Aslan, ZenZone Forum 9 Comments [12/19/2018 11:11:16 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: WarGoatHK417