[Eeswaran]

Re: I had to adopt

Is there a book I can download for free which sets out the religion of the flying spagetti monster?

Or do I have to shell out money to buy a book?

[Jo Freddie]

Re: I had to adopt

Oh crap you're in it now if Mr. Diamond is interested in you. He practically ruined my life in 24 hours. Well I guess that means we'll find out everything soon enough.

Seth, I have always fond Mr Diamond to be very reasonable and easy to sort things out with. You just need to find the right way to reach an understanding with him.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: I had to adopt

6 pages of absolute twaddle as two different Elohim cults get their under-garments in a twist about things that are none of their business.

Now let us put aside the King James Collected Book of Fairy Tales and look at the things that have been reviled to His Creation by The One True God, The Flying Spaghetti Monster.

The Random Number of Not Commandments, Suggestions:

3. Judge not, for verily it be not thine job neither most likely to be thine business.

8. Thou shalt not feel guilty for feeling good.

The Eight "I'd Really Rather You Didn't's"

4. I'd really rather you didn't indulge in conduct that offends yourself, or your willing, consenting partner of legal age AND mental maturity. As for anyone who might object, I think the expression is "go f*** yourself," unless they find that offensive in which case they can turn off the TV for once and go for a walk for a change.

8. I'd really rather you didn't do unto others as you would have them do unto you if you are into, um, stuff that uses a lot of leather/lubricant/vaseline. If the other person is into it, however (pursuant to #4), then have at it, take pictures, and for the love of Mike, wear a CONDOM! Honestly, it's a piece of rubber. If I didn't want it to feel good when you did it I would have added spikes, or something.

The Book of Piraticus
Chapter 3

1 And he shall make the analogy that just as two completely different alcoholic beverages are equal, all people are equal.
2 Yes, I know it's kind of a leap, but trust me, I‟m the FSM.
3 I love all people equally, so no holy wars or gay bashing or anything like that.
4 There's no reason for any of that.

Pastalm XII

7 I'd also like to officiate over gay unions. Lots and lots of gay unions.
8 I feel that the FSM would appreciate this, since It has a lot of noodly appendages and would want us mere humans created in It's image with noodly appendages to get together and attempt to procreate.
9 I'm also cool with lesbian weddings because the FSM also respects those created with more meatball-like attachments. 10 And if the meatballs and noodles want to get together, it's all good because the FSM is cool about that.
11 Unlike some imaginary deities who are such prudes they don't even have sex with women to get kids, the FSM has the meatballs and noodles all coming together out in the open in a free expression of high-carb goodness.

[Brother Snapper Grogan]

Re: I had to adopt

God's law is clear, a man should not lye with another man. end of story, if a man is found to lye with another, the only thing we should concern ourselves with is punishment. This way we can all get back to worshiping God, they way He intended us to live.

I shudder at the thought of a man lyeing with another man. As far as I know there's no biblical injunction about it, but I'd imagine that it must be very painful - at least if they're not both wearing rubber gloves.

There is no homosexual debate, because there are no homosexuals, there is only the ACT and the consequence of just punishment. After which we can go back to work, read our bible, bake pies, etc. etc.

Let me see if I can follow this...if a man lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, he's not a homersexual. After he's done it he can bake a pie. And baking a pie doesn't make him a homersexual either, even though everyone knows that baking pies is the work of women or pasta-worshippers.

You'll forgive my confusion I hope.

I fear that it's the pit for you, laddie.

[Seth Campbell]

Re: I had to adopt

scherzo, a few unanswered questions remain. Now you my choose to ignore them, but they still remain.

What is the name of your Church, AFK stands for some thing, explain!
Why have you not Glorified the Name Of Jesus?
Why are you so protective of Homosexuals?
Reveal your self as the troll that you are!

Oh crap you're in it now if Mr. Diamond is interested in you. He practically ruined my life in 24 hours. Well I guess that means we'll find out everything soon enough.

[Phebe Carlyle]

Re: I had to adopt

The answer to your question is 'no'

Then what does the acronym stand for, Mr Scherzo?

and I'm not wishing to cause conflict, strict following of God's word is what I am trying to accomplish. To accept that homosexuals exist is only the beginning of arguments in Legislation and church. Why would the government need to even address a law that deals with homosexuals if they do not exist? I do not see any laws that give special credit to 'Sasquatch' or 'Martians' because they don't exist, and that is the way government should deal with homosexuals, no laws, no special recognition, because quite simply they don't exist.

Are you hetrosexual, Mr scherzo and is the ACT of sexual liason the only thing that defines you as being a hetrosexual (if you are hetrosexual)

God's law is clear, a man should not lye with another man. end of story, if a man is found to lye with another, the only thing we should concern ourselves with is punishment. This way we can all get back to worshiping God, they way He intended us to live.

There is no homosexual debate, because there are no homosexuals, there is only the ACT and the consequence of just punishment. After which we can go back to work, read our bible, bake pies, etc. etc.

I can be hetrosexual without the ACT, just as if I caught The Gay, I could quite possibly "be" gay without any sexural ACT involved. I am a woman though and God never referenced female homerness as being an abomination. (Truth be told I have always wondered about Naomi and Ruth).

Are you OK with women who catch the Gay?

So a couple more questions for you there Mr Scherzo.

I look forward to your reply.

YIC,

Mrs.P.Wintersnow

[Sam Diamond]

Re: I had to adopt

scherzo, a few unanswered questions remain. Now you my choose to ignore them, but they still remain.

What is the name of your Church, AFK stands for some thing, explain!
Why have you not Glorified the Name Of Jesus?
Why are you so protective of Homosexuals?
Reveal your self as the troll that you are!

[Brother Harold Porter]

Re: I had to adopt

The answer to your question is 'no'

and I'm not wishing to cause conflict, strict following of God's word is what I am trying to accomplish. To accept that homosexuals exist is only the beginning of arguments in Legislation and church. Why would the government need to even address a law that deals with homosexuals if they do not exist? I do not see any laws that give special credit to 'Sasquatch' or 'Martians' because they don't exist, and that is the way government should deal with homosexuals, no laws, no special recognition, because quite simply they don't exist.

God's law is clear, a man should not lye with another man. end of story, if a man is found to lye with another, the only thing we should concern ourselves with is punishment. This way we can all get back to worshiping God, they way He intended us to live.

There is no homosexual debate, because there are no homosexuals, there is only the ACT and the consequence of just punishment. After which we can go back to work, read our bible, bake pies, etc. etc.

Looney tunes.

Why would the government (or states) need to address laws for pedophiles, drug addicts, thieves and rapists if they don't exist either? After all, it is only their actions?

They couldn't possibly be painted with such a broad brush that DESCRIBES their actions in terms the layman understands? Heavens no!

I've truly never encountered such idiotic "reason" in all my life.

Yours in Christ!

[Phebe Carlyle]

Re: I had to adopt

Don't worry sister, he also ignored my question about using words that aren't in the Bible. He's about as easy to follow as a Tolstoy novel.

Thank you so much Brother Seth. He has not even had the respect to reply to you either?? What a so 'n so!

Gosh, I thought this fellow was much like the very misogynistic non Christian men that the Pastors and Rev Jim have warned me about, but it appears his issues are much deeper than first realized.

He has also been using words not found in the KJV1611?

Is their no end to his abuse?!?!?!

YIC,

Sister Phebe.

[Seth Campbell]

Re: I had to adopt

I find it interesting that this scherzo fellow tends to want conflict.

I asked him a simple question, not actually related to faggotry and he completely and utterly ignored me.

Perhaps he only wants to deal with the men in the church, knowingly wanting to cause tension and distress! Brothers, take from that what you will!

You should know though, Mr Scherzo, that yes, whilst I am merely a woman, here in LBC, I am several rungs up the ladder from you, so you ARE to treat me with the utmost respect and if I ask you a question, you WILL surely answer it.

I await your reply.

YIC,

Mrs.P.Wintersnow.

Don't worry sister, he also ignored my question about using words that aren't in the Bible. He's about as easy to follow as a Tolstoy novel.

[Benedict A. Davis]

Re: I had to adopt

The answer to your question is 'no'

and I'm not wishing to cause conflict, strict following of God's word is what I am trying to accomplish. To accept that homosexuals exist is only the beginning of arguments in Legislation and church. Why would the government need to even address a law that deals with homosexuals if they do not exist? I do not see any laws that give special credit to 'Sasquatch' or 'Martians' because they don't exist, and that is the way government should deal with homosexuals, no laws, no special recognition, because quite simply they don't exist.

God's law is clear, a man should not lye with another man. end of story, if a man is found to lye with another, the only thing we should concern ourselves with is punishment. This way we can all get back to worshiping God, they way He intended us to live.

There is no homosexual debate, because there are no homosexuals, there is only the ACT and the consequence of just punishment. After which we can go back to work, read our bible, bake pies, etc. etc.

I found somebody that agrees with everything you just said!

[scherzo]

Re: I had to adopt

I asked him a simple question, not actually related to faggotry and he completely and utterly ignored me.

The answer to your question is 'no'

and I'm not wishing to cause conflict, strict following of God's word is what I am trying to accomplish. To accept that homosexuals exist is only the beginning of arguments in Legislation and church. Why would the government need to even address a law that deals with homosexuals if they do not exist? I do not see any laws that give special credit to 'Sasquatch' or 'Martians' because they don't exist, and that is the way government should deal with homosexuals, no laws, no special recognition, because quite simply they don't exist.

God's law is clear, a man should not lye with another man. end of story, if a man is found to lye with another, the only thing we should concern ourselves with is punishment. This way we can all get back to worshiping God, they way He intended us to live.

There is no homosexual debate, because there are no homosexuals, there is only the ACT and the consequence of just punishment. After which we can go back to work, read our bible, bake pies, etc. etc.

[Benedict A. Davis]

Re: I had to adopt

because you do not know me, yet you have seen my words

1 john 4:20

If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

Isn't it about semantics and false prophets what they are discussing in Luke 20-

45Then in the audience of all the people he said unto his disciples, 46Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;

[scherzo]

Re: I had to adopt

Why do I get the feeling that you would accept correction as easily as I would accept Satan at Sunday dinner?

because you do not know me, yet you have seen my words

1 john 4:20

If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

[Brother Harold Porter]

Re: I had to adopt

What I want is to say, 'hello' as this is an introduction post. I do not wish to address "free will" at all, but it is pleasant to exercise one's mind in fellowship. How else can I accept correction if not by speaking and asking questions

You aren't asking "questions". You are spewing nonsense like the morning after a bean feed and a pitcher of margaritas.

The crack isn't helping, my friend. We'll get you some help...

Yours in Christ!