This site is blocked here at work, you'll have to post some of the text.....Silver said:
Uhh...so much more for loving your fellow man and woman.MikeD said:Thank God for the bombing of London's subway today - July 7, 2005 - wherein dozens were killed and hundreds seriously injured. Wish it was many more.
In my long edit, I sort of talked about that...lemme find you the bit from their site about that... (From the FAQ)reflux said:Uhh...so much more for loving your fellow man and woman.
Is that site for real or is it a spoof site? I pray it's a spoof site.............MikeD said:Cut and pasted:
Thank God for the bombing of London's subway today - July 7, 2005 - wherein dozens were killed and hundreds seriously injured. Wish it was many more.
"But thou shalt say unto them, This is a nation that obeyeth not the voice of the Lord their God, nor receiveth correction; truth is perished, and is cut off from their mouth." Jer. 7:28.
England: Island of the Sodomite Damned
Tony Blair and his Bitch Barrister Wife [pics]
These two have let England to irreversible doom, pushing the fag agenda. It is now a crime to preach God's truth about fags in England. Blair wants to be president (Antichrist) of EU (European Union), whose laws also criminalize Gospel preaching.
I SOOOO wish I could cut and paste this, too, but it's a .pdf...
http://www.godhatesfags.com/fliers/jul2005/20050705_walton-in-hell.pdf
The Onion couldn't come up with stuff this good.
MD
Edit: You've GOT to love these people's logic. Boils down to: "hmm, people I don't like were killed...[I've decided] it's God's wrath and I understand it completely and my worldview is strengthened by it!! Oh, wait, people I like were killed! Ummm...it's God's will; I suddenly don't understand why they died, butit must be his will to have their souls in heaven! (or, possibly, it was the work if Satan, who is thwarted in the end because they're in a happy eternity now instead of this devil-wracked world!!)"
It's the ultimate in smugness... I claim to understand things perfectly when I want to, and I give myself over to blind acceptance when I can't explain them. Sort of destroys the "mystery" (in a big sense) of God...accepting the world as God's will is comprehensible, but the jumping between revelling in death and destruction and then calmly accepting it seems a bit off. I could understand if they honestly thought it was a case of Sodom and Gommorah, and prayed for the souls of the dead regardless, but is it *people's* jobs to spread God's wrath? He apparently does a pretty good job of that on his own... I know, in a perverse way, they consider themselves Christian "tough love," and that they're just trying to show the "fags" the error of their ways and their eternal conequences...
OK, enough wasting my time on these guys. Sorry.
Oh, no way, man...they're the real deal. They were picketing churches down the road in La Jolla, CA the other week. "Thank God for 9/11" and "You fags are going to hell" signs all over. Must've been a nice road trip from Kansas...see the heathen California coast with all its damned...Andyman_1970 said:Is that site for real or is it a spoof site? I pray it's a spoof site.............
So I guess the whole passage in 1 John 4 where John says that if you don't love those around you and yet claim to love God you're a liar.......... :mumble:MikeD said:Doesn't the Bible say that God loves everyone?
No. You are probably thinking of John 3:16, which says no such thing. The word translated "world" in that verse (kosmos) NEVER means every individual of mankind who has ever lived (see, e.g., John 17:9). Romans 9:13 says that God hated Esau, and Psalm 5:5 says that God hates all WORKERS of iniquity (e.g., fags). Other examples are Proverbs 6:16-19, Psalm 11:5, and Malachi 1:3. Given these verses, how can you say God loves everyone? Can you really say "God loves everyone" when God says "I hated Esau?" Does God love the people in hell?
Or, you are thinking of "God is love." God certainly is love, toward His elect (His children). But He certainly is not love toward the reprobate (children of the devil). That's why His elect go to heaven, and the reprobate go to hell. In Romans 9:13, which says "As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated", Jacob is a representative of God's elect, while Esau is a representative of the reprobate. In Romans 1, the word "reprobate" is used to describe fags. Fags are reprobate. God hates reprobates. Therefore, God hates fags.
Furthermore, God specifically says that He ABHORS people who engage in sodomy (as well as other forms of sexual perversion): "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them...And ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which I cast out before you: for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them." Leviticus 20:13,23. Understand? GOD ABHORS FAGS.
God's hatred is one of His holy attributes, whereby He reveals Himself as having a fixed and immutable determination to punish the finally impenitent with eternal perdition. God's hatred is not like man's hatred. His hatred is holy, pure, unchanging, while man's hatred is a sinful, fickle emotion.
This makes me physically sick..............MikeD said:Oh, no way, man...they're the real deal. They were picketing churches down the road in La Jolla, CA the other week. "Thank God for 9/11" and "You fags are going to hell" signs all over. Must've been a nice road trip from Kansas...see the heathen California coast with all its damned...
They don't talk much about Jesus, really, do they? Mostly seem to be old-testamenty kinds of people.Andyman_1970 said:This makes me physically sick..............
On behalf of those of us who truly desire to follow Jesus and live out His teachings I apologize for this church and what they teach - it is not a true representation of Jesus or what He desires His followers to be.
Oh, but they do love those around them...those "elect" around them. God's real children and all....not the FAGS!!!Andyman_1970 said:So I guess the whole passage in 1 John 4 where John says that if you don't love those around you and yet claim to love God you're a liar.......... :mumble:
Even the Torah doesn't advocate hate like this, or hate period for that matter - that whole "love your neighbor as yourself" is from Leviticus. One of Judaism's most briliant rabbi's (r. Hillel) said that "the whole Torah hangs on this commandment", with which Jesus marries that to "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind" as the two most important commandments. Maybe their version of the KJV leaves these verses out.........LOLMikeD said:They don't talk much about Jesus, really, do they? Mostly seem to be old-testamenty kinds of people.
Well the problem with that verse, is the word "brother", as in those who hate their brother, is the Greek word adelphos, which can mean someone of like faith, neighbor, or country man - so it's not just limited to those who are Christians as to who we are commanded to love.MikeD said:Oh, but they do love those around them...those "elect" around them. God's real children and all....not the FAGS!!!
I suggest you email them with your scriptural concerns...Andyman_1970 said:Well the problem with that verse, is the word "brother", as in those who hate their brother, is the Greek word adelphos, which can mean someone of like faith, neighbor, or country man - so it's not just limited to those who are Christians as to who we are commanded to love.
Do they realize that Gentiles are not the "elect"?
Yeah like they'd listen to meMikeD said:I suggest you email them with your scriptural concerns...
"Westboro Baptist-Executing your Faggot Messiah since 1 AD!!!"Andyman_1970 said:I remember this rabbi from the 1st century who was executed for His accused "false" teachings............
AD is the approximation of His birth..............nice slogan though........LOLMikeD said:"Westboro Baptist-Executing your Faggot Messiah since 1 AD!!!"
(Ed: Wait, does AD begin when Christ was born, or when he died?)
'resorted to?' That's kind of their first (and last) line of defense..DRB said:Wouldn't you love to see them spouting off to a crowd and then have Andyman appear? I bet it would take 2 exchanges before they resorted to fag loving jew.
As a Gentile, I take that as the utmost of compliments................LOLDRB said:Wouldn't you love to see them spouting off to a crowd and then have Andyman appear? I bet it would take 2 exchanges before they resorted to fag loving jew.
my work filter blocks it under the category "hate speech"Andyman_1970 said:This site is blocked here at work, you'll have to post some of the text.....
You're not serious...?Changleen said:AD = After Death? That's what I was always taught.
They're actually pretty funny, and its especially satisfying since they're doing MORE harm than good to their cause. :nuts:MikeD said:Oh, no way, man...they're the real deal. They were picketing churches down the road in La Jolla, CA the other week. "Thank God for 9/11" and "You fags are going to hell" signs all over. Must've been a nice road trip from Kansas...see the heathen California coast with all its damned...
Nah, I'm confident that they're not really trying to recruit for or promote their cause...they seem happier to become a smaller and smugger and angrier group of the exclusive "God's Elect" in this disgusting world, hoping for the end of the world and their "deliverance" so they can look down on everyone else even more. (In their minds, quite literally "look down" from heaven on the [preacher] boiling brimstone lake...[/preacher])dante said:They're actually pretty funny, and its especially satisfying since they're doing MORE harm than good to their cause. :nuts:
From my point if view it's disgusting, they are taking something beautiful like the the teachings of Jesus and perverting them in the name of "righteousness". Unfortunately, when people find out I'm a Christian I get painted with the same brush as these who claim to follow Jesus.dante said:They're actually pretty funny, and its especially satisfying since they're doing MORE harm than good to their cause. :nuts:
I think you're right, they aren't too interesting in evangelism, but that's the case for most fringe Calvinist's, they tend to have a "Holy country club" mentality - which BTW is no where to be found in the Scriptures.MikeD said:Nah, I'm confident that they're not really trying to recruit for or promote their cause...they seem happier to become a smaller and smugger and angrier group of the exclusive "God's Elect" in this disgusting world, hoping for the end of the world and their "deliverance" so they can look down on everyone else even more. (In their minds, quite literally "look down" from heaven on the [preacher] boiling brimstone lake...[/preacher])
I wonder if that Muslim family down the street from me ever feels that way?Andyman_1970 said:Unfortunately, when people find out I'm a Christian I get painted with the same brush as these who claim to follow Jesus.
Wrong! I quote the Book of Caddyshack, 1:5-Andyman_1970 said:they tend to have a "Holy country club" mentality - which BTW is no where to be found in the Scriptures.
that's the playground metric that i was taught as wellMikeD said:You're not serious...?
Anno Domini, "In the year of our Lord."
Hmm, makes sense. BC = Before Christ? No to that too? Shows how much variance there is in teaching.MikeD said:You're not serious...?
Anno Domini, "In the year of our Lord."
Actually...BC is for Before Christ. If you look at n8's wikipedia link, apparently that also means that, as a Latin term, "AD" *should*, gramatically, come before the date... AD 100, for example. But BC as an English term should, gramatically, come afterward... 150 BC. It also notes that no one's following that convention anymore.Changleen said:Hmm, makes sense. BC = Before Christ? No to that too? Shows how much variance there is in teaching.
Strange that I got taught that -My school did Latin too. Ecce, In pictura est puella, nomina Pam:MikeD said:Actually...BC is for Before Christ. If you look at n8's wikipedia link, apparently that also means that, as a Latin term, "AD" *should*, gramatically, come before the date... AD 100, for example. But BC as an English term should, gramatically, come afterward... 150 BC. It also notes that no one's following that convention anymore.
Plus, now it's not "BC" anymore. It's "BCE"-"Before Common Era" Noticed this when I was reading my GF's educational literature (she used to edit middle-school level reference books). I thought it was a mistake, but apparently, in the 7 years I've been out of school, that's now the rage.
MD
Yeah I wonder if all those normal Muslims in the UK right now feel that way as well.Silver said:I wonder if that Muslim family down the street from me ever feels that way?
(Whistling innocently...)
Rule of life 27: Everyone in their life gets hit with the generalization brush. There are no exceptions to that rule.Silver said:I wonder if that Muslim family down the street from me ever feels that way?
(Whistling innocently...)