Wait, what? The OP thinks he’s a vampire? 
I think we’re misunderstanding each other - very probably my fault.
I make moral and ethical judgements all the time, and I don’t see anything wrong with that.
However I don’t back them up with a world view based on a self-contradicting ‘holy book’.
And, to get back to my actual first point, I think arguing with people that do is generally a waste of time; especially by quoting lines from said “self-contradicting ‘holy book’”.
Apparently so. But maybe on a metaphorical level.
Others think that the son of god resurrected, or that angels dictated their holy book.
What can you do?
Point and laugh at the whole lot of them?
My arm would get tired.
Well now, that was really convincing. 
I didn’t say that all Christians were right-wing, Fundamentalist literalists. That would be pretty easy to disprove. Duh!
I said that in the end, whenever they make statements, their arguments go back to the rule book. Perhaps that’s not surprising since that’s what they’re basing their faith on. But depending on which interpretation they’re using, they generally default to using the Bible as their source for their arguments in a way that’s pretty black and white.
And I’m sure I won’t change that. Because you’re the open-minded one, right?
That reminds me. . . I need to get back to that thread.
WhyNot, I generally trust your judgment, but I’m a little skeptical here. You must see very different posts than I do.
In almost every post I’ve seen of FriarTed’s, I remember thinking to myself if he was mocking Christianity by using his username. He sounds more like The Onion in most of his posts, and his post in this thread is no exception. I mean. . . who talks like that? And some, like the one linked in this thread, isn’t even close to something a Christian would say, hopefully.
All that “love your neighbor” guff may have helped Christianity rise to power, but it’s completely useless at helping it stay in power so it was discarded long ago. Ted isn’t the first Christian to ignore inconvenient and outdated scripture. He’s not even the billionth.
Hahahaha I’d forgotten about that aspect of the OP.
He’s so deep, you know.
Well…for this issue at least, I’d like to change my answer. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt, but his post in this thread indicates that, on this issue, he’s a dick. Fire away,** illuminati’**.
If it weren’t for the death penalty, Jesus would be alive today. He was tried, convicted and executed by lawful authorities and got a whole New Testament as a result. Darn good publicity for a local boy from Nazareth. The death penalty’s not all bad.
Friar Ted is one of the posters for whim I have a great deal of respect; and while I don’t have a whole lot of overlap with him perspective-wise, I just don’t see any sign of hypocrisy, which to me means “pretending to a set of moral standards or beliefs which one does not actually hold or believe in”. I don’t even see any major inconsistencies.
No one but Ted gets to say what his moral standards are, or what Christianity means to him.
I highly doubt that anyone expects Christians to be perfect, but when they go about trying to lay punishment on non-Christians who are not perfect, that is hypocritical.
This is probably why Christians have so much trouble getting the rest of us to believe they only want good in the world, when they are revering a man who got petty with a fig tree and destroyed others’ property in a fit of tantrum.
Err, reread that sentence. Are you saying that non-perfect people should never lay punishment on anyone?
OK, I know this is personally relevant to you & I can respect your disagreement with my belief in capital punishment for child molesters. I still believe it to be a permitted & perhaps Divinely-encouraged penalty but YMMV.
So if I’m a dick on this, make the most of it.
Btw, for the purpose of clarity, in the New Covenant, the death penalty is only permitted for actual violent crimes & perhaps truly twisted sexual practices (bestiality & necrophilia come to mind). Bringing up Levitical taboos & covenantal violations that were capital crimes in the OT is irrelevant. If such taboos & violations are relevant to in the NT era, the strongest penalty is excommunication.
Maybe IlluminatiPrimus is a pedophile and doesn’t like you dissin on his people’s. 
Do they have a saying in your community? There’s no blood like the young blood?
Maybe you guys should just kiss and make up, you have something in common, you both belong to a cult of blood drinkers.
Oh the Vampirism jokes - because those never get tired. As I said anything I think or say comes from me, not the religious system I subscribe to - I don’t need someone else to think for me. I also find it interesting that people latch onto that aspect of me and then proceed to dismiss me as a result (rather than on what I have have said or done) whereas they’re willing to jump to the aid of a Christian despite what they have said. No double standards there, nope, not at all.
Anywho… I find it somewhat laughable that people here think Christianity should get a free pass for its overwhelming hypocrisy and/or that people who identify as Christians can’t be held in any way responsible for the contradiction of their beliefs with their own words/actions. I’d have less of a problem with Christianity and its adherents if it weren’t so loudly declaiming other people and trying to tell other people how to live their lives, often through political (and sometimes physical) force. If Christians said “Well in my view paedophilia is an abomination unto God and I harbour feelings of violence towards them, but it’s not my place to judge and after all that’s what the courts are there for” then I’d have no problem, just as if they said “Well in my view homosexuality is wrong but I wouldn’t want to be forced to live according to someone else’s belief system so I won’t try and make others live according to mine” but as we know that isn’t the case either (cough prop 8 cough).
Again, I’m not a hypocrite, there is no contradiction between my beliefs (religious or otherwise) and what I have said here or anywhere else on this message board. Keep throwing that charge against me if you think it fits but unless you’ve got something to substantiate that with I’m not going to take such a charge seriously.
As for calling me a bigot, defined as “a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.” - well that shoe doesn’t fit either. I’ve been on this board nearly three years and have yet to pit someone based on their religion, and in fact I tend to keep my thoughts on religion to myself unlike some other posters. If I were utterly intolerant of it that wouldn’t be the case, and I am not in fact utterly intolerant of Christians as a group as I’ve known plenty of people who I like and respect who identify as Christian. But then they weren’t the kind of Christian to claim the moral high ground simply because of their religion, dictate to others how to live or (indeed) advocate violence against others. That’s probably why I liked them.
Oh who am I kidding - yes I’m a paedophile and this is all a big smokescreen. Don’t know why I didn’t admit that before. :rolleyes:
There’s no bigger atheist around here than me, and I’m totally on Ted’s side with this one. He’s a Christian, not Christ, and I haven’t seen him being preachy or moralistic as a general rule. Anyway, if you’re going to break the rules and judge somebody, it might as well be pedophiles.
And since I’m not a Christian – I judge pedophiles to be the scum of the earth and well deserving of a bash on the head.
faints
recovers to say
Thanks!
faints again
Wow - when Dio weighs in on your side you know you’re in the right.
Am I being sarcastic, am I not? Who can say?
What about child mutilators?
Oppressive dictators?
Genocide practitioners?
Cat lovers?
People who cough at the theatre?
I mean, since your judging, why stop? Perhaps you can draw us up a sliding scale of evil acts and the amount of physical punishment each one deserves. I’d appreciate it as, personally, I never know when to stop beating on someone of low moral standards. Is is judged on a certain amount of blood? Or do I take permanent injury into account?
Thanks.