Because you did not serve the Lord

[Cari]

I’m wondering, at what point in discussions like these, do the warnings against throwing what’s holy to dogs or pearls before swine begin to sound loud and clear?

I’m just sayin’, anyone who goes to the trouble of creating a signature line that includes using the entrails of priests to strangle kings might be less interested in what’s holy and more interested in what’s horrible.

But I’m from Mississippi, and we’re sometimes slow…

 

[NotWorthy]

I’m wondering, at what point in discussions like these, do the warnings against throwing what’s holy to dogs or pearls before swine begin to sound loud and clear?

I’m just sayin’, anyone who goes to the trouble of creating a signature line that includes using the entrails of priests to strangle kings might be less interested in what’s holy and more interested in what’s horrible.

But I’m from Mississippi, and we’re sometimes slow…

The way I see it is, If you don’t want to answer magisterfaust’s inquiries because you think he’s disingenuous, then answer them for others who have the exact same questions, but with a little more honesty in their search. I’ve received more than one PM from someone thanking me for answering a question even though the original question was a slam or slap. Others come here for answers and they should be able to find them!

Remember the Lurkers!!!

 

[juliamajor]

I have never claimed to be an athiest. Nor am I an athiest. A neo religious anarchist is what is. I believe in something, just don’t know what that is yet

Ah,-I said" IF" your an atheist. I’d still like to know about the udjat.

 

[NotWorthy]

Ah,-I said" IF" your an atheist. I’d still like to know about the udjat./quote]Great! Yet another word I need to learn!

 

[Cari]

The way I see it is, If you don’t want to answer magisterfaust’s inquiries because you think he’s disingenuous, then answer them for others who have the exact same questions, but with a little more honesty in their search. I’ve received more than one PM from someone thanking me for answering a question even though the original question was a slam or slap. Others come here for answers and they should be able to find them!

Remember the Lurkers!!!

Like I said, I’m from Mississippi; I’m sometimes slow.

 

[guanophore]

Because you did not serve the Lord your God with joyfulness and gladness of heart…blah blah… I wil get really really cross and I will shout lots and finally I will bring upon you a nasty and violent death…

C’mon folks… weigh up the choices… Hmm! Devotion to The Lord…(with a BIG smile).Or
a yoke of iron around my neck till I am destroyed…a nation who shall eat the offspring of my cattle and the fruit of my ground untill i am destroyed… leave me no grain, wine , or oil untill they have caused me to perish.

Oooh!! It gets better

I shall be left to eat the offspring of my own body and the flesh of my sons and daughters.

We talk of living in a democratically elected society…where fairness and justice prevail… And then I read this. I is very confused

Your tagline has a very interesting quote. You need to cite your source.

 

[whiteknite]

Pious Fraud!!!

What is Pious Fraud?

Pious fraud was a common technique employed by early Christian writers to make a point. Their intention was to convert anyone and everyone by any means available. One of the more persuasive methods was to write a text and falsely tell others that it was written in first person. For example, the four canonized gospel tales were not written by Matthew, Mark, Luke or John. That has been a well known fact for about 200 years. And to this day, no one knows who the gospel stories were written by. These texts are perfect examples of pious fraud. Pious fraud is the foundation of the deception known as Christianity and it continues to this day.

During the first couple of centuries of the Common Era the early Christian priestcraft, which would eventually become the early Catholic fathers, were in the process of assimilating religions from all over Europe. Ultimately the new religion become known as the Christian religion, or more accurately The Catholic Church. The Bible was put together by hundreds of people who were either at the head of the fraud or were pawns in its assembly. Once the original languages were translated into Latin, it was only a matter of time before the original language nuances could be discarded. Ever wonder why it was punishable by death to read the Bible during the Middle Ages? Punishable by death by the common folk to read it, that is. Well, the reason was that the priestcraft was well aware of the errors, inconsistencies and flat-out lies that riddled the Bible. If the common man found out, it could have been the death of the Church’s authority, power and control over the masses. And since the original languages are rarely, if ever, used by those who read the Bible (well, those who actually READ it), the fraud is perpetuated.

When a pious fraud is knowingly perpetuated in the name of power and money, you have deception. Remember, 1700-2000 years ago, when these texts were being assembled into a ‘new testament’, the vast majority of humanity was illiterate. Science was not known. Demons rules the world. Anything could be put forth and said to be ‘absolute truth’ when it was in fact, completely fraudulent.

:knight1:

 

[peary1]

The point is … publicly, God is portrayed as some merciful, loving
figure on a par with santa clause. Yet under the surface lies this selfish, tantrum prone spoilt hormonal teenager. If he can’t get his own way every time, he will bring down destruction upon those who, not only will not play his game, but when they do, refuse to let him win, have the biggest toy, or play the loudest instrument.
Believe in God or be severely punished.

**Wow…what a corrupt version of the Gospel you have! Christians are of the New Testament. If you want to know the revelation of God to humankind then that is where I suggest you start. **

 

[Ruthie]

“whiteknite” wrote:
*Ever wonder why it was punishable by death to read the Bible during the Middle Ages? Punishable by death by the common folk to read it, that is.
*
Prove that. You made the statement; now back it up.

Ruthie

 

[Ruthie]

Refutation:

1. The “common folk” in the middle ages could not read. There were no public schools. Readers were clergy and some landed gentry. A common way of proving that one was a cleric was by showing that one could read.
2. There were no printing presses, and there was no paper. Each Bible was hand-written on parchment - thin leather also carefully prepared by hand, one piece at a time. Depending on how highly decorated it was, a Bible took from two to five years to produce, which priced it well out of the range of the common folk.

I await your proof of the death sentence for reading the Bible.

Ruthie

 

[NotWorthy]

Refutation:

1. The “common folk” in the middle ages could not read. There were no public schools. Readers were clergy and some landed gentry. A common way of proving that one was a cleric was by showing that one could read.
2. There were no printing presses, and there was no paper. Each Bible was hand-written on parchment - thin leather also carefully prepared by hand, one piece at a time. Depending on how highly decorated it was, a Bible took from two to five years to produce, which priced it well out of the range of the common folk.

I await your proof of the death sentence for reading the Bible.

Ruthie

Our good whitenite has once again taken a story, kept a grain of truth, and gone with falsehoods to flesh it out.

Was reading of the bible forbidden from time to time in the Middle Ages? Well, yes and no.

No - the legitimate Catholic Bible was never forbidden from reading by the faithful.

Yes - blasphemous re-writes of the Bible which twisted the truth to further a group’s collective agenda were forbidden.

 

[peary1]

Refutation:

1. The “common folk” in the middle ages could not read. There were no public schools. Readers were clergy and some landed gentry. A common way of proving that one was a cleric was by showing that one could read.
2. There were no printing presses, and there was no paper. Each Bible was hand-written on parchment - thin leather also carefully prepared by hand, one piece at a time. Depending on how highly decorated it was, a Bible took from two to five years to produce, which priced it well out of the range of the common folk.

I await your proof of the death sentence for reading the Bible.

Ruthie

Right on, Ruthie Is it just me or that these people have no clue about history?? I mean, to appear that foolish I would just as well hide my head somewhere.