moderator, can we have a "True Christians" section and a "Fake Christians" section?

it is getting really confusing in here... the "True Christians" would be the place where the Deists, Gnostics and Unitarians could post and the "Fake Christians" could be where all the Nicene Creders post

 

Sounds like a great idea, Chief, but there might be intellectual property issues involved here.

"True Christian®" is a registered trademark of Landover Baptist Church:

http://www.landoverbaptist.com

, where the unsaved are unwelcome. Glory!

And I'm sure their team of True Christian® lawyers would sue this site in an instant if we were to somehow associate their trademarked term with such things as Deism, Gnosticism, or (heaven forbid!) Unitarianism.

 

Wow, EllisD, where do you find this stuff?!? I mean I knew there were some f*cked up people out there claiming to be doing "God's work," but it is just amazing what people can get away with and still call themselves "Christians."

Maybe it would be a good idea if someone clarified just what a Christian is supposed to act like, because this is definitely some Old Testament sh*t being espoused on the site you linked to.

Where’s the love and compassion and forgiveness? What happened to all those great lessons taught by the Son of Man? Pearls before swine, I guess...

 

I think that site was a satire... at least I certainly hope so.

 

I love Landover. It is one of the funniest sites one the planet.

And, yes, it is complete satire. This is from their Terms of Service right in the Preface.

Now, knowing that... go read the letters... they are the funniest part.

 

ChiefCowpie,

I have ask you yet again to please provide some solid historical evidence to support your repeated claim that Gnosticism, Deism, Unitarianism, etc. represent the "true" teachings of Jesus and his earliest followers. Otherwise, you have no basis whatsoever for describing this hodgepodge of heresies as "Christian."

 

hahahahaha

 

Yuk Yuk EllisD!

Wow your having a hilarious old time supermoderating these Christian Forums!

I wonder how long I can go mocking your fake beliefs (notice I stated that like it was a fact) and making EllisDtripp parody's while 'high fiving' and smirking about how stupid you are?

I bet that , suddenly, you will become extremely serious and concerned about 'fairness' to others and forum guidelines?

DarrelKitchen was a bigot too but at least he didnt pro-actively set about to FLAME BAIT the very forum he was 'moderating' like YOU DO EllisDtripp.

I defend your right to be a flame-baiter Ellis - but I just wanted to know how quickly you will try and take away my right to call you on it?

Days?
By the next time I try and post?
When you get zinged back and it makes you mad?

 

"Maybe it would be a good idea if someone clarified just what a Christian is supposed to act like, because this is definitely some Old Testament sh*t being espoused on the site you linked to. "

i think that site is clarifying what a christian is supposed to act like








i called the number they gave for the church, but the number didnt work

i love the parts on women

"
Landover Baptist Creation Scientist, Dr. Fred Neiman, announced findings related to his research into the female soul early this week. "The absence of either salvation or condemnation for women finds extensive support in the Word of God." He reported. "Jesus said that the sole reason God created women in the first place was to provide company and service to men (1 Corinthians 11:9), God determined that men would be lonely living alone, so he created women purely to keep men company and serve their needs (Genesis 2:18-22). Women are therefore completely subordinate to men (1 Corinthians 11:3). It stands to reason, though, that once men enter the Kingdom of Heaven, they will be one with God, and will no longer be lonely and in need of mortal companionship. Thus, the reason behind having women will no longer exist. Women, like the members of the animal kingdom, will fall by the wayside."
Dr. Neiman went on to say that, "once men reunite with their maker, they will no longer be burdened with the care of women. After all, women were inferior creations from the start. Women are fond of self-indulgence (Isaiah 32:9-11). They are silly and easily led into error (2 Timothy 3:6). They are subtle and deceitful (Proverbs 7:10; Ecclesiastes 7:26). They are zealous in promoting superstition and idolatry (Jeremiah 7:18; Ezekiel 13:17, 23). And they are active in instigating to iniquity (Numbers 31:15-16; 1 Kings 21:25; Nehemiah 13:26). It was the inherent weakness of women that led them to be deceived by Satan (Genesis 3:1-6; 2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:14). Consequently, women were cursed from the start (Genesis 3:16). There is simply no room in heaven for such flawed and inadequate beings."
"

"PLEASE NOTE: "If you send an e-mail submission to this site, you are certifying that you are 18 years or older and you are granting The Landover Baptist Parody Website a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive and fully sublicensable right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display your submission (in whole or part including your personal e-mail address) and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed."


that site rivals www.jesusishitler.com in its humor

 

And what might those "fake beliefs" be, Juicey?

And exactly what forum guidelines did my post violate? Please provide a quote of the relevant text.

If you take the LBC site as "flame bait", perhaps it is because it comes a little too close to the truth about SOME so-called Christians? Maybe it makes you examine some of your own behavior? At any rate, this thread has nowhere NEAR the flamebaiting potential (or downright stupidity) of the "You Might be an Atheist if..." thread you and the others are yukking it up in. The thing about a Goose and a Gander comes to mind about now....

Gee, I'm so freaking honored, Juicey! I can hardly contain myself....

Are you going to "defend" ChiefCowpie, too? After all, he is the one who actually STARTED this thread in the first place. You know, with that post that called you a "Fake Christian"?

You're right on the edge of the cliff, Juicey. So close that the slightest wind could knock you over.....I hope you didn't have beans for dinner!

 

Your last comment is the only one I need to see.

Not that Im surprised though.

Hey.. your the one who has to sleep at night knowing your a hypocritical asshole.


Edit: P.s.. I LOVE Landover Baptist because it demonstrates how pathetic critics must be that they actually have to create an imaginary soft target customised to accomodate their own misguided arguments.

Everytime I see that site it makes me laugh - at you.

 

Take it outside, Ellis and Juiceman.

 

I just can NOT wait until the personal forums are back up... **rolling eyes**

At least then there will be an "outside" to take these kinda things to!

But hopefully it won't get in there in the first place.

*sigh*

 

Trading personal barbs can occur through private messages; it doesn't contribute anything to these discussions. (If Juiceman thinks Ellis is a baiter, why does he keep taking the bait?)

Back to the topic of this thread, I'm still waiting for a response to my earlier post. I'm assuming that the evidence I requested hasn't been presented because it doesn't exist.

 

cheif, there is a name for gnosticism, its called gnosticism, why dont you put your posts under that and leave the christians alone?

 

unitarians, deists and gnostic don't have to kill 50 million people to prove their religion is right as have the nicene creders...that's proof enough for me

 

well...

gnosticism did evolve around the same time as pharisee-ism & the new covenanters movement (& the essenes as well)...
and it was the first major "heresy" that "the church" had to contend with; and as such, it had a definite effect on the growth of "orthodox" ( here meaning as opposed to heterodox, & not in the sense of "eastern" churches) --- the apostles creed, & more emphatically the nicene & athanasian creeds were promulgated as an antidote to the gnostic interpretation(s) of the christ story...
and many of those who could be called gnostic considered themselves to be christian (or even "the true christians"...); but their insistance on direct personal revelation, and the delusional faith of "the uninitiated, and their resitance against central authority, eventually relegated them to the sidelines --- but only after a couple of centuries of vigorous contention; and something mirroring the gnostic view tends to pop up every few generations... indeed, harold bloom thinks that gnnosticism is an unstated (& perhaps even unrealized) major influence on american christianity (& its many offshoots, including stuff like christian science, mormonism, & even some of the pentecostal & charismatic strains...)

and unitarian/universalist folks - well, they think jesus is totally cool, they just don't want to call him god...
& deists think god is totally cool, they just don't want to call him jehovah...
...

ymmv...

 

___________________________________
big·ot Pronunciation Key (bgt)
n.
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
___________________________________

Though JM3 is not around for my response, I'm sure he will incarnate again. But, since I have no partialities to a group, and have not been pushing Buddhism, have not spoken in any manner which relates to race or color of skin, and have no politics whatsover ... then the only thing I differ is that the term "Bigot" oes not apply to any part of me.

Not once have I shown partiality to a group, religion, race or political topic or subject. But then again why should I?

Sorry ... but the term in which you apply this to is incorrect and based solely on personal bias and has no logical basis.

Perhaps because I differ on how one treats another human being is why you would think I'm being a "Bigot"?

Who knows.

Metta,

Darrell

HTML:

HTML:

HTML:

HTML:

 

DarrellKitchen, I'm really sorry that you got called a bigot by Juiceman. I've only read a few of your posts, and you certainly don't seem to in any way deserve that label ,you appear to be a fair-minded and thoughtful person.

However I've also read some of Juicemans posts and yes he is antaganostic,but frankly I've seen a lot worse,and I can only assume he has been banned because of his previous bad reputation in the old forum. That seems to me to be a shame as I thought in starting again we were wiping the slate clean for everyone,

feeling that something somewhere isn't quite right in all this

best wishes

Moominmamma

 

Moominmama, don't complain too much about Juiceman's banishment... that is grounds for your own banishment according to the forum guidelines. **rolls eyes**