[Brother Temperance]

Re: A question brothers?

No. These are my own conclusions from studying science. But many in my church agree with this privately.

And? Why have these demons not been excommunicated for hating Jesus yet?

God doesn't hate anybody.

Lies lies lies!
Deuteronomy 12:31 Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God: for every abomination to the LORD, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods.
Deuteronomy 16:22 Neither shalt thou set thee up any image; which the LORD thy God hateth.
Amos 6:8 The Lord GOD hath sworn by himself, saith the LORD the God of hosts, I abhor the excellency of Jacob, and hate his palaces: therefore will I deliver up the city with all that is therein.
Psalm 11:5 The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.
Proverbs 6:16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

The Lord hates the wicked and those that commit abominations. That means He hates Catholics, crypto-catlick Anglicans, and especially humanists.

There was (in my scientifically informed opinion) no Garden of Eden, it was a mythical place in a metaphorical story.

A metaphor for what, you silly girl? Explain how you see the Garden of Eden as being a metaphor for why human choice, reason and logic are good things.

Oh I wouldn't be interested in the Quakers, they're about 200 years behind the times and they're fundies.

You can't even get your anti-God cults right!

Unlike many other groups that emerged within Christianity, the Religious Society of Friends has tended away from creeds, and in modern times away from hierarchical structure.
Although Quakers throughout most of their history and in most parts of the world today consider Quakerism to be a Christian movement, some Friends (principally in some Meetings in the United States and the United Kingdom) now consider themselves universalist, agnostic, atheist, nonrealist, humanist, postchristian, or nontheist, or do not accept any religious label. Calls for Quakerism to include non-Christians go back at least as far as 1870, but this phenomenon has become increasingly evident during the latter half of the 20th century and the opening years of the 21st century, and is still controversial among Friends. An especially notable example of this is that of Friends who go beyond simply being non-christian, but actively identify as a member of another faith, such as Islam or Buddhism.

Despicable hellbound fools they are; fundamentalists they most certainly are not.

Humanists can believe what they want, but on the issue of gays I personally happen to be against the same-sex lifestyle.

Great. You are too full of hatred to be a humanist, but too full of demon nonsense to be a real Christian. You must be pretty lonely.

[SalvationSeeker]

Re: A question brothers?

And so it comes out..
The anglicant's are just a bunch of humanists with another name and fancy rituals.

Every anglicant reading this, leave that false church NOW!
Do you really want to put your immortal soul in the hands of befuddled humanists like noddy??

[Sister Noddy]

Re: A question brothers?

Do you really want to put your immortal soul in the hands of befuddled humanists like noddy??

AAAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHHH! good try, both of you

... but sorry ... noddy nods standing for the Anglican Church no matter what

[SalvationSeeker]

Re: A question brothers?

... but sorry ... noddy nods standing for the Anglican Church no matter what

That comes as little surprise to me.
You care more about your precious institution than the fate of those you delude, and even your own fate. Nor do you care about truth.
So make no mistake, you simple woman: You are heading towards eternal damnation, along with every single member of your "church".
AND ON THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT, YOU WILL HAVE TO ANSWER FOR EVERY SOUL YOU'VE DAMNED!

It's sad really, how people like you can be so deluded by satan and their own vain imaginations, and will never get to know the true Jesus or His love.

[Sister Noddy]

Re: A question brothers?

You can't even get your anti-God cults right!

Despicable hellbound fools they are; fundamentalists they most certainly are not.

Okay Brother T, I've read this link to the Quakers. Interesting stuff. I stand corrected about the Quakers.

[Brother Temperance]

Re: A question brothers?

Okay Brother T, I've read this link to the Quakers. Interesting stuff. I stand corrected about the Quakers.

Translation: Having discovered a limp-wristed bunch of false Christian sissies who're even more sinful than the Anglicans, Noddy prepares to jump ship.

[The Adversary]

Re: A question brothers?

No. These are my own conclusions from studying science. But many in my church agree with this privately.

God doesn't hate anybody. There was (in my scientifically informed opinion) no Garden of Eden, it was a mythical place in a metaphorical story.

Aren't we having fun?

Hi all, haven't been around for awhile, but this thread has certainly turned into something interesting, and I must comment! Feminister Noddy has revealed a rather interesting belief set here, I don't even know where to begin!

First of all, "according to humanism, it is up to humans to find the truth, as opposed to seeking it through revelation, mysticism, tradition, or anything else that is incompatible with the application of logic to the evidence" - so humanists tend to make rather confused clergypersons.

Second, the main flaw with humanism is that it is further celebration of human beings. Humans have quite the egos already and feel that they have the moral superiority to slaughter every other creature on the planet at will - why would you EVER want to allow humans to decide on their own what is moral and ethical behavior? We simply cannot be trusted. If you want to see the logical end result of secular humanism, do some research into the child-warriors of the Congo. With no religion mind-controlling them they are killing and eating other humans pretty indiscriminately. Check this random link http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20038999/ and then try to convince me that mountain gorillas would behave the same without the need for the threat of eternal damnation

There was (in my scientifically informed opinion) no Garden of Eden, it was a mythical place in a metaphorical story.

This one always bothers me. The Hadam and Eve story is very important and people like you should not be preaching anything to anybody until you understand it. Since you believe in evolution, I'll explain it thus:

The Garden of Eden is NOT a mythical place, it is a very REAL State of Ignorance. Animals exist in this state in the wild in our present day and they feel no shame for their sexual activities and they do not possess our concepts of morality nor our penchant for cruelty. Therefore, they are Innocent.

In evolution, clearly at some point there were hominids who existed in this State of Ignorance. But sooner or later, they "ate of the Fruit of Knowledge" i.e. became self-aware and congnated at a higher level, and lost their innocence. In Anglican Minister terms, they were BOOTED OUT OF THE GARDEN OF EDEN BY A JEALOUS GOD.

You see, once these hominids ceased being homo erectus and became human beings they had the ability to choose their actions, examine them, and became aware of the consequences. Thus, they began to form notions of morality, and learned shame. They also began to realize how ridiculous we look like naked compared to, say, a tiger. Anybody who reads the Bible and worships within a Judeo-Christian religion should understand that they worship a deity who told us that "Ignorance is Bliss".

The opposite of Bliss is Hell. Therefore, it's not surprising that we eventually got Lucifer the light-bringer out of the serpent who convinced Eve to eat of the Fruit of Knowledge. (The story of Eve is probably the most feminist part of the entire Bible, as it claims that female brains evolved first. Luckily for men though, patrist societies are usually better at war than matrist societies which is why nobody lives in longhouses in Amerika.)

Humanists can believe what they want, but on the issue of gays I personally happen to be against the same-sex lifestyle.

I don't get this - you are against same-sex people living together, but your entire Anglican cult was founded when the monstrous King Henry VIII was the excommunicated by the cathylicks. Was his lifestyle morally superior?! As matter of fact, since Henry created the Church of England so that he could marry Anne Bolyn, and since he later executed her for using witchcraft to trap him into marrying her... well, you see where I'm going here.

The Anglican Church was founded upon witchcraft. Now we have a feminister in the pulpit every week, preaching about a god she does not believe in. Instead, she places limits on God, "he exists within, but not without", and places her trust in evil humanity.

Noodles, how doth thou plead? Is there something behind these inconsistencies that I am missing?

[Sister Noddy]

Re: A question brothers?

Hello Adversary, you have got a lot to say here. Let me answer each part.

First of all, "according to humanism, it is up to humans to find the truth, as opposed to seeking it through revelation, mysticism, tradition, or anything else that is incompatible with the application of logic to the evidence" - so humanists tend to make rather confused clergypersons.

I'm not clergy, I'm a Lay Eucharistic minister, and assist the clergy at the altar and give the Chalice (Cup) to each communicant at the kneeling rail.

Second, the main flaw with humanism is that it is further celebration of human beings. Humans have quite the egos already and feel that they have the moral superiority to slaughter every other creature on the planet at will - why would you EVER want to allow humans to decide on their own what is moral and ethical behavior? We simply cannot be trusted.

Yes we are morally, and mentally, superior (to other animal species) due to the evolution of our brains over a couple of million years. Yes, we most certainly can (and should) decide what is moral and ethical behavior. Yes, ideally we do have the capacity to be trusted; many people cannot be trusted, true, but ideally we should be able to achieve a trustworthy state; a fair and workable code of moral and ethical standards can (and should) be maintained in our society, and although religion has contributed to culture and wonderful architecture and sacred music and many great things, it is not needed to achieve intelligent secular social order.

The Garden of Eden is NOT a mythical place, it is a very REAL State of Ignorance. Animals exist in this state in the wild in our present day and they feel no shame for their sexual activities and they do not possess our concepts of morality nor our penchant for cruelty. Therefore, they are Innocent.

In evolution, clearly at some point there were hominids who existed in this State of Ignorance. But sooner or later, they "ate of the Fruit of Knowledge" i.e. became self-aware and congnated at a higher level, and lost their innocence.

The Garden of Eden is metaphorical for that 'state of ignorance'. But in the story in Genesis is it presented as a real garden, a place. But basically I agree with what you are saying here.

don't get this - you are against same-sex people living together, but your entire Anglican cult was founded when the monstrous King Henry VIII was the excommunicated by the cathylicks. Was his lifestyle morally superior?! As matter of fact, since Henry created the Church of England so that he could marry Anne Bolyn, and since he later executed her for using witchcraft to trap him into marrying her... well, you see where I'm going here.

Henry wasn't gay. No matter what kind of a jerk he was otherwise, this has nothing to do with my own comment that I personally disagree with the same-sex lifestyle.

The Anglican Church was founded upon witchcraft. Now we have a feminister in the pulpit every week, preaching about a god she does not believe in. Instead, she places limits on God, "he exists within, but not without", and places her trust in evil humanity.

No, the Anglican Church wasn't founded upon witchcraft. No I am not a feminister. No, I don't preach in the pulpit. The only things I do in the pulpit are lead the Psalm and announce the Prayers of the People at the appropriate moments during the service. My functions are to help the Deacon set the Table for the Holy Eucharist, and present the Cup to each communicant at the rail, repeating the Words of Distribution.

Cheers!

-- Noodles

[The Adversary]

Re: A question brothers?

I'm not clergy, I'm a Lay Eucharistic minister, and assist the clergy at the altar and give the Chalice (Cup) to each communicant at the kneeling rail.

I see, I took minister as a verb I guess, sorry.

Yes we are morally, and mentally, superior (to other animal species) due to the evolution of our brains over a couple of million years. Yes, we most certainly can (and should) decide what is moral and ethical behavior. Yes, ideally we do have the capacity to be trusted; many people cannot be trusted, true, but ideally we should be able to achieve a trustworthy state; a fair and workable code of moral and ethical standards can (and should) be maintained in our society, and although religion has contributed to culture and wonderful architecture and sacred music and many great things, it is not needed to achieve intelligent secular social order.

This is the part about humanism I hate the most. We may be mentally superior, but we are most certainly not morally superior! Animals just don't have the capacity for Evil that we do. Genocide is unknown to them and they are just not capable of institutionalized atrocities that we commit. For every kind charity we create, it is far outweighed by something like the Catholic Inquisition which lasted far longer than the Red Cross has.

Evolution of our brains? What good is it if our souls don't evolve to keep pace?

Henry wasn't gay. No matter what kind of a jerk he was otherwise, this has nothing to do with my own comment that I personally disagree with the same-sex lifestyle.

I'm sorry, I was unclear. Henry was not gay, but he was the titular Head of the Church in his time and the catalyst for the whole Anglican Succession. I just find it ironic that you are against same-sex lifestyle but your church was founded under a human whose lifestyle was far worse than any gay person except a Jeffrey Dahmer.

Cheers, yourself!

[Sister Noddy]

Re: A question brothers?

This is the part about humanism I hate the most. We may be mentally superior, but we are most certainly not morally superior!

Animals just don't have the capacity for Evil that we do. Genocide is unknown to them and they are just not capable of institutionalized atrocities that we commit. For every kind charity we create, it is far outweighed by something like the Catholic Inquisition which lasted far longer than the Red Cross has.

Evolution of our brains? What good is it if our souls don't evolve to keep pace?

I'm sorry, I was unclear. Henry was not gay, but he was the titular Head of the Church in his time and the catalyst for the whole Anglican Succession. I just find it ironic that you are against same-sex lifestyle but your church was founded under a human whose lifestyle was far worse than any gay person except a Jeffrey Dahmer.

Cheers, yourself!

I do agree with everything you've said in this post, Adversary.

Cheers!

-- nods

[SalvationSeeker]

Re: A question brothers?

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust,
Avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.
Grace be with thee. Amen.
1 Timothy 6:20-21

[Brother Temperance]

Re: A question brothers?

Yes we are morally, and mentally, superior (to other animal species) due to the evolution of our brains over a couple of million years.

This is the part about humanism I hate the most. We may be mentally superior, but we are most certainly not morally superior! Animals just don't have the capacity for Evil that we do.

I do agree with everything you've said in this post, Adversary.

Why do you keep contradicting yourself? Has God made you a spastic as well as a hellbound False Christian? Do you agree with Satan's vegan nonsense or don't you?

[Brother Temperance]

Re: A question brothers?

Yes we are morally, and mentally, superior (to other animal species) due to the evolution of our brains over a couple of million years.

This is the part about humanism I hate the most. We may be mentally superior, but we are most certainly not morally superior! Animals just don't have the capacity for Evil that we do.

I do agree with everything you've said in this post, Adversary.

Why do you keep contradicting yourself? Has God made you a spastic as well as a hellbound False Christian? Do you agree with Satan's vegan nonsense or don't you?

[Sister Noddy]

Re: A question brothers?

Why do you keep contradicting yourself? Has God made you a spastic as well as a hellbound False Christian? Do you agree with Satan's vegan nonsense or don't you?

Hmmm Brother T ... I decided that Mr Adversary was right after all, that humans are mentally superior to animals, not morally superior. In fact, animals don't have any sense of right and wrong, only humans understand good and evil.

Um ... where does Satan's vegan nonsense fit in here, did I miss something? anyway I'm not a vegan, if that's what you're thinking.

[Brother Temperance]

Re: A question brothers?

Hmmm Brother T ... I decided that Mr Adversary was right after all, that humans are mentally superior to animals, not morally superior. In fact, animals don't have any sense of right and wrong, only humans understand good and evil.

So we're capable of good, and animals aren't, but we're not morally superior to them.

Um ... where does Satan's vegan nonsense fit in here, did I miss something?

Satan's vegan nonsense will probably fit in the space between your ears if you don't reject Godless humanism and get right with Christ fast. Satan is another word for the Adversary, and Mr. Satan's pro-animal line shows clear evidence of vegan influence.