Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
Self Righteous Religionists, Just Gotta Love Em Eh?
323 Answers
My sons G/F is pregnant.
Her Uncle is a pastor.
He's just stated that the baby (my grandson) is a product of sin.
You just got to love these people of faith havnt you?
Dick!!
Her Uncle is a pastor.
He's just stated that the baby (my grandson) is a product of sin.
You just got to love these people of faith havnt you?
Dick!!
Answers
During an impassioned sermon about death and final judgement, the pastor said forcefully, "Each member of this church is going to die and face judgement." Glancing down at the front pew, he noticed a man with a big smile on his face - the man was called Nailit. The minister repeated his point louder. "Each member of this church is going to die and face...
21:19 Thu 11th Feb 2021
Theland - // No. A true believer could not.
I'm not talking about religious but jobs here, who hear voices etc. //
As usual, when prodded, you resort to the galaxy-sized ego of the fervent in that you presume to know what God wants, and whom he speaks to - or not.
It is not for you to decide that Mr Sutcliffe's assertion that he obeyed God's instructions made him, 'a religious nut job' to use your delightful terminology.
As far as I can see, he is no more of a 'religious nut job' than Abraham, Moses, Mary, and Jesus, who all claimed to hear God speaking to them - Mr Sutcliffe merely confirmed the same, and who are you to decide that the rest were entirely within their right minds, and he was the exception?
Could it be that his actions in staving in the skulls of innocent women was merely part of 'God's plan' - which Christians constanty confirm he has for all of us? Let's be honest, it's hardly worse than some of the actions God has seen carried out in his name - too many to list here of course, but i am sure you can think of a few.
So as far as I am concerned, Mr Sutcliffe was every bit as much of a Christian as you are, and he carried out God's commandments as God told him to do.
Can you honestly argue with any basis of evidece that what I say is not true, as opposed to saying you would like it not to be true, which of course is not the same thing.
I'm not talking about religious but jobs here, who hear voices etc. //
As usual, when prodded, you resort to the galaxy-sized ego of the fervent in that you presume to know what God wants, and whom he speaks to - or not.
It is not for you to decide that Mr Sutcliffe's assertion that he obeyed God's instructions made him, 'a religious nut job' to use your delightful terminology.
As far as I can see, he is no more of a 'religious nut job' than Abraham, Moses, Mary, and Jesus, who all claimed to hear God speaking to them - Mr Sutcliffe merely confirmed the same, and who are you to decide that the rest were entirely within their right minds, and he was the exception?
Could it be that his actions in staving in the skulls of innocent women was merely part of 'God's plan' - which Christians constanty confirm he has for all of us? Let's be honest, it's hardly worse than some of the actions God has seen carried out in his name - too many to list here of course, but i am sure you can think of a few.
So as far as I am concerned, Mr Sutcliffe was every bit as much of a Christian as you are, and he carried out God's commandments as God told him to do.
Can you honestly argue with any basis of evidece that what I say is not true, as opposed to saying you would like it not to be true, which of course is not the same thing.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.