Badchad, Cthulhu loves you. Of course by ‘loves you’ I mean wants to devour your soul!!
badchad, I love you.
What?
"Somewhere near Silenus, Lord, I let her slip away / Lookin’ for that home / And I hope she finds it … "
badchad, the Flying Spaghetti Monster loves you. Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
I’m an atheist, so how to respond? Oh, I know!
Badchad, no-one loves you!
JOhn.
I’m not eager to see him banned, though I figure it’s pretty much inevitable at this point. He hasn’t yet addressed my question about exactly how Christians are condemning people to Hell when Hell isn’t defined in the New Testament and I’m curious how he would, if he has the stones!
In this particular instance, the popular imagery of Hell is derived from Dante and Milton rather than scripture, rather like basing your opinion of Star Trek on fan fiction. I figure if badchad wants to see Christianity’s scripture challenged and exposed as nonsensical and self-contradictory, he should stop lazily assuming Hell is part of it.
I think it was supposed to be satyrical 
Geez Poly, puns like that make the baby Jesus cry or at least the very young translucent one horn filly snort in disgust.
Jim
Yeah, I was thinking that, but decided the FSM would be funnier.
It’s only when the words cunt or pussy are used as insults that I am uncomfortable. Thanks for being a friend about it.
Of course similar words describing the male anatomy are used for insults too, but not quite with the same connotations.
[/hijack]
Maybe this is TPTB’s way of letting us know that they have relaxed their standards and we are all free to conduct ourselves as badchad has without fear of being banned. (Just don’t be a sock.)
Why don’t you test my theory on…hm…try Giraffe. See if you get banned.
Wait.
One second.
How do we know it is Tom that is a weasley mother fucker?
Maybe it’s debb.
:dubious:
Actually I didn’t even say that much. I just agreed that it was in “accordance” with my goals, not that it was a goal in and of itself. Anyone who argues otherwise apparently does not think my actual actions deserve banning and as such feel they need to make stuff up. And that sure sounds like jerk behavior to me.
… :rolleyes:
Ok, I think I regained my faculty for speech.
So, what you’re saying badchad, is that harassing Poly was not your goal in and of itself, but was just in agreement with your personal master plan? I see. Ok, I have two questions:
-
What are you smoking?
-
Can I have some?
Being a linguist, I am very fascinated by a number of aspects of that field. One such aspect is the study of Semantics. I am thrilled with it as a scientific discipline. What saddens me, though, is the games certain people play under the guise of semantics.
I mostly enjoy GD and the Pit, I like GQ also, and the other boards I usually only check occasionally. I like and read about a lot of the discussions here I just generally don’t get involved in any of the others, as A) I don’t have much spare time, and B) I don’t feel the need to respond if someone else is adequately covering the bases that I think need to be, or C) I don’t think I have an educated opinion on a given topic and thus just read to learn. I’ve thought about entering some gun control threads but as of yet haven’t, my perceived unique perspective, would be one as a class 3 weapons owner, which I haven’t heard of from anyone else yet.
Sure, I’m interested in a lot of other threads. In fact I think this board, and this world, would be better if the religious stuff were generally assumed ignorant and no more worthy of serious discussion than searching for gold at the end of a rainbow. Cause it isn’t.
There’s no evidence whatsoever for the first sentence. And, interestingly, the second sentence bears no relation whatsoever to the first sentence. Though it’s quite telling that despite your theoretically interest in “a lot of other threads” you cannot go even a single post without beating on (or off?) your favorite, which is to say only, subject.
Yes.
I’ve talked about this before, and argued it in depth with DtC. My take is that hell is definitely a concept in the NT. There are definite descriptions of torment, and words of everlasting punishment. There are also descriptions of killing the soul. I don’t think things are quite as neat as DtC puts it but I don’t think his ideas are not without reasonable merit. As such I have mentioned several times that hell; be it eternal torment, or temporary torment followed by a Hitler style execution is not a place a loving being would send you. It’s certainly not a place a loving being would predestine you too, as described in the NT. Any god that would throw people in hell, particularly for not believing in him, or not worshipping him is a god I’d spit on.
If you’re talking about a fiery hell with suffering, that’s not true, there are numerous biblical references describing hell as such.
Hell is part of it…
… and nowhere is it described as a pleasant place to be.
Who cares. I don’t need to prove my interest in other topics. I was asked so I answered.
BTW, Jodi what are your current thoughts on “free will?” You went silent after DtC and to a lesser extent I, made what I thought were some irrefutable points. You just went quite for a several weeks. I know, cause I looked for you. Did you ever change your mind? If not, why not?