The Landover Baptist Church Forum

The Landover Baptist Church Forum (https://www.landoverbaptist.net/forumindex.php)
-   Creation Science (https://www.landoverbaptist.net/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost. (https://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=98100)

Zechariah Smyth 11-07-2015 05:01 AM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Ascended (Post 1165428)
blah blah blah Not one of these creatures would use these terms to identify themselves. blah blah blah

:huh:

Hey Dr. Doolittle, I'm sure that your in-depth stories about man-on-beast relations will be fascinating, but have you considered following the site rules and making a thread of your own in the Introduction Forum telling us about your relationship with Jesus?

We want to get to know you!

:yahoo: :praise: :yahoo:

Yours in Christ,

Z. Smyth

Alphonse Alban 02-21-2016 10:07 AM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Homotherium :angry:
Apparently this was some sinful pre-flood cat. Thank God, that God drowned this one, but it just shows that roots of anti-Christian gaysexual agenda goes deep in the history! Even though God killed it, it still wise to avoid even mentioning such gaysexual animals.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...rium_serum.jpg

Titus Templeton 02-21-2016 11:28 AM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
I wonder if we can outlaw biology in all forms. The only way to protect our children. And rapists are basically a product of biology.

RegofChrist 02-25-2016 08:19 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
http://i.imgur.com/lXlObJc.jpg

The 'Satanic Leaf Tailed Gecko' is a sinful reptile which worships Lucifer.

Ph0enix808 02-26-2016 05:01 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Flat Worms are VERY satanic

they breed by being homer tranny freaks




Shrimp, The bible says so

RegofChrist 02-26-2016 09:00 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Alphonse Alban (Post 1175053)
Homotherium :angry:
Apparently this was some sinful pre-flood cat. Thank God, that God drowned this one, but it just shows that roots of anti-Christian gaysexual agenda goes deep in the history! Even though God killed it, it still wise to avoid even mentioning such gaysexual animals.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...rium_serum.jpg

Homotherium was also called the 'Scimitar Cat'. (ie a sword which isn't straight)

anthonyhonciano 03-02-2016 07:41 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Hello all, I'm a bit concerned about how this thread started that these animals, which were named by humans, are chosen to be banned.

There are a couple of questions I have that I would like clarification on. Since these animals are being banned, based on their names, is this taken into consideration that the words like "cock" and "tit" were not even promiscuous until sexuality started evolving?


Also, why ban them solely on their nicknames? They do have technical names such as "parus major" for the naked mole rat. I mean, if this is a global issue across christianity, why not provide an alternate name?


It seems very premature (and kid like) method of thinking to ban living creatures solely on their shortened name. This is like denying education to any child to teach them the fact that these creatures exist.

I Man Rastafari 03-03-2016 12:45 AM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by groovdafied (Post 1175785)
is this taken into consideration that the words like "cock" and "tit" were not even promiscuous until sexuality started


Greetings groovdafied. Welcome to Earth and this forum. I do not speak for the Baptists. In fact sometimes they can barely tolerate me but you do not have to be Baptist to know that sexuality started before English was even invented. These Baptists will straighten you out in good order.


Jah Guide!
Trevor

Alphonse Alban 03-03-2016 07:32 AM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by anthonyhonciano (Post 1175785)
They do have technical names such as "parus major" for the naked mole rat.

Parus Major means Great tit, dummy. Besides, Latin is the language of Satan used by the Right hand of Satan, the Pope and his minions. Ever wondered why the darkest part of Americas is called LATIN america!?
Obviously monkey worshipers used the language of God, American, to make these animals even more insulting.

anthonyhonciano 03-24-2016 03:41 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Alphonse Alban (Post 1175841)
Parus Major means Great tit, dummy. Besides, Latin is the language of Satan used by the Right hand of Satan, the Pope and his minions. Ever wondered why the darkest part of Americas is called LATIN america!?
Obviously monkey worshipers used the language of God, American, to make these animals even more insulting.

There's no need for name calling, I'm only curious how others perceive education and information, and also curious if alternatives were explored for this matter.


Doesn't it seem immature to ban an animal, solely on how humans identify it by name? Am I also correct to assume, that if you and I were to have an educated conversation (or just out of fascination about birds) about the Titmouse bird, that we aren't referring to the vulgar part of the word "tit," based on its urban definition?


It's really about context, and how the people are using the name in the conversation. It's like the technical term for "sex," which is another term for "classification" for male and female. So if I was to point out clothes that are unisex in design, I wouldn't mean that it's for intercourse, but it's clothes designed for both male and female.


Couldn't Christians come up with an alternative, if the above can never be considered? Just like how Christians have the pledge of allegiance to the Christian flag and the traditional American pledge of allegiance, couldn't a different "Christian" name be coined for animals that you feel offensive to its given name?

Mary Etheldreda 03-24-2016 04:18 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by anthonyhonciano (Post 1177160)
There's no need for name calling, I'm only curious how others perceive education and information, and also curious if alternatives were explored for this matter.


Doesn't it seem immature to ban an animal, solely on how humans identify it by name? Am I also correct to assume, that if you and I were to have an educated conversation (or just out of fascination about birds) about the Titmouse bird, that we aren't referring to the vulgar part of the word "tit," based on its urban definition?


It's really about context, and how the people are using the name in the conversation. It's like the technical term for "sex," which is another term for "classification" for male and female. So if I was to point out clothes that are unisex in design, I wouldn't mean that it's for intercourse, but it's clothes designed for both male and female.


Couldn't Christians come up with an alternative, if the above can never be considered? Just like how Christians have the pledge of allegiance to the Christian flag and the traditional American pledge of allegiance, couldn't a different "Christian" name be coined for animals that you feel offensive to its given name?

I find your aggressiveness and utter lack of concern for the degradation of morality in this world to be rather frightening. So Christians should simply change the reference of some things to ignore the Satanic influence upon society? We should turn a blind eye to the moral destruction of our youth? We should embrace sodomy and science and give our tithes to preservation of nature, or perhaps the department of welfare? Good grief. Why not tell our children that their souls aren't immortal, they don't have to worry about their eternal well-being, and what they do on this earth should count only insofar as it affects others on this earth, rather than focusing on sympathy for the Baby Jesus who hung on the cross for their sins.

anthonyhonciano 03-24-2016 04:52 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mary Etheldreda (Post 1177164)
I find your aggressiveness and utter lack of concern for the degradation of morality in this world to be rather frightening. So Christians should simply change the reference of some things to ignore the Satanic influence upon society? We should turn a blind eye to the moral destruction of our youth? We should embrace sodomy and science and give our tithes to preservation of nature, or perhaps the department of welfare? Good grief. Why not tell our children that their souls aren't immortal, they don't have to worry about their eternal well-being, and what they do on this earth should count only insofar as it affects others on this earth, rather than focusing on sympathy for the Baby Jesus who hung on the cross for their sins.

Hi Mary, thanks for your response. I was aiming for quite the opposite in my questions, because again I'm very curious how information and education is perceived by different religions and cultures.


My questions weren't recommendations, but just questions.


Code:

So Christians should simply change the reference of some things to ignore the Satanic influence upon society?
I didn't recommend to ignore anything. The fact that these animals are being criticized by the human definition, and not for the actual creatures they are is what i'm trying to get clarification on. An example like saying shoot, or shucks (which I'm positive many Christians do say), which can be argued as the derivative of profanity such as sh**, or f***. If "Titmouse" was re-identified, this is the same example.


I believe you're taking my questions way out of context that I'm suggesting we need to sweep the issues under a rug and call it a day. That's not my intent at all. I mean, I understand we all make compromises in life, but I'm actually referring in simple identification of animals that are brutally ignored based on urban definition.
We should turn a blind eye to the moral destruction of our youth?
Are you telling me that the creature itself is evil in nature, or against Christianity? This is where my confusion lies. If the animals are not evil in nature, and can be accepted as God's creatures of life, what other solution is there to protect these animals without having to ban them? Talking about the identification of an animal, or at least making it politically correct in terms for Christianity does not mean that you're required to alter your faith. Nothing can change your faith, but as humans we are given the gift of common sense knowing right to wrong. When we teach others what we believe is correct in the Christian Faith, we are being human and expanding ourselves in the pursuit of knowledge, existence and growth into our faiths. Taking in common sense in this path of Christianity, you are allowing your self the knowledge to continue your growth by not denying what exists.

It's hard to ask these question on black and white text, without hearing or knowing the tone how the message is being delivered. I'm really trying my best to be respectful in these forums, as I'm not battering or name calling anybody. As person in this forum seeking answers, I would have assumed that Christians would be willing to help me better understand the meaning of the religion, and your love for God.

Mary Etheldreda 03-24-2016 09:23 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by anthonyhonciano (Post 1177166)
As person in this forum seeking answers, I would have assumed that Christians would be willing to help me better understand the meaning of the religion, and your love for God.

You're not looking for answers to help you find God, you're looking *at* us the same way Dian Fossey looked *at* gorillas in the mist to find answers to her personal questions. Well you know who played Dian Fossey in the movies?

Sigourney Weaver!

The same harlot who played the "Gate Keeper" (THAT's not sexual!) in Ghostbusters:


https://v1.std3.ru/500/ca/72/1413885...df5a40cf95.jpg


Notice any similarities with "Generation X's" moral mascot, Dr. Frank N. Furter?


http://i.imgbox.com/adlD9K4N.jpg


Coincidence?

I think not.

anthonyhonciano 03-24-2016 10:30 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mary Etheldreda (Post 1177189)
You're not looking for answers to help you find God, you're looking *at* us the same way Dian Fossey looked *at* gorillas in the mist to find answers to her personal questions. Well you know who played Dian Fossey in the movies?

Sigourney Weaver!

The same harlot who played the "Gate Keeper" (THAT's not sexual!) in Ghostbusters:


https://v1.std3.ru/500/ca/72/1413885...df5a40cf95.jpg


Notice any similarities with "Generation X's" moral mascot, Dr. Frank N. Furter?


http://i.imgbox.com/adlD9K4N.jpg


Coincidence?

I think not.

I never claimed that I'm looking for answers for my love of God, nor am I looking at you as a subject. I never told you my faith or beliefs, as it seems you are pre-judging me, which is fine - we all make judgements.


It also seems we're flying off topic (pun intended), because the questions are being avoided now. How do you protect those animals, with names that you feel are offensive, from being banned from education or basic knowledge?


Or do you wish to only ban these animals to logically deny their existence because their names are similar to the urban definition? How is that fair to life?

Basilissa 03-25-2016 12:39 AM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by anthonyhonciano (Post 1177197)

It also seems we're flying off topic (pun intended), because the questions are being avoided now. How do you protect those animals, with names that you feel are offensive, from being banned from education or basic knowledge?

Or do you wish to only ban these animals to logically deny their existence because their names are similar to the urban definition? How is that fair to life?

Why on earth would we have to be "fair to life" (whatever it is supposed to mean)? :huh:

Anyway. While it is true that at the moment there isn't much we can do to eradicate these sinful species, I trust that President Trump (:wub:), once elected, will do everything possible to wipe them out of the face of the earth - and we will celebrate that by eating the last of their species during our Annual Endangered Species Dinner. :giggle:

John Scopes 03-27-2016 06:25 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by anthonyhonciano (Post 1177160)
There's no need for name calling, I'm only curious how others perceive education and information, and also curious if alternatives were explored for this matter.


Doesn't it seem immature to ban an animal, solely on how humans identify it by name? Am I also correct to assume, that if you and I were to have an educated conversation (or just out of fascination about birds) about the Titmouse bird, that we aren't referring to the vulgar part of the word "tit," based on its urban definition?


It's really about context, and how the people are using the name in the conversation. It's like the technical term for "sex," which is another term for "classification" for male and female. So if I was to point out clothes that are unisex in design, I wouldn't mean that it's for intercourse, but it's clothes designed for both male and female.


Couldn't Christians come up with an alternative, if the above can never be considered? Just like how Christians have the pledge of allegiance to the Christian flag and the traditional American pledge of allegiance, couldn't a different "Christian" name be coined for animals that you feel offensive to its given name?

Welcome to this most fascinating place. You will come to find christians, and evangelicals in particular, to be spectacular examples of retarded evolutionary development. I have compiled volumes of scientific data in my time here, and it never gets boring.

Ezekiel Bathfire 03-27-2016 08:33 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Let me correct your post
Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scopes (Post 1177357)
Welcome to this most fascinating place. You will come to find Christians (politeness costs nothing), and Evangelicals (neither does capitalizing proper nouns) in particular, to be spectacular examples of retarded (extremely offensive word for those blessed by The Lord) evolutionary development (Evolution is merely a theory and lacks proof.). I have compiled volumes of scientific data in my time here (all of which is ungodly and unreadable), and it never gets boring listening to my own voice whining in the wilderness.

I hope that helps. :thumbsup:

Comatoserocker 05-28-2016 03:40 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Don't you understand politics? It's not like the president can just say something and it's instantly a law. There's all the stuff with bills and vetoes and all that, and it's not like someone would even have the stupid idea to murder God's wonderful creations. He created them like that, and there was nothing wrong with the designs. But these days, people just have dirty minds and try to incorporate sexuality into everything. God knew this, and it was still His decision to create them this way. You all must be pretty dirty if you find something wrong with a beaver. And about the platypus controversy, they're AUSTRALIAN, not Austrian, and they use their bills to dig in the sand. And animals can't sin, they don't have immortal souls anyways. (Proverbs 12:10, Genesis 1:30, Genesis 1:21, James 3:7)

Elmer G. White 05-28-2016 04:04 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Comatoserocker (Post 1182439)
Don't you understand politics? It's not like the president can just say something and it's instantly a law. There's all the stuff with bills and vetoes and all that, and it's not like someone would even have the stupid idea to murder God's wonderful creations. He created them like that, and there was nothing wrong with the designs. But these days, people just have dirty minds and try to incorporate sexuality into everything. God knew this, and it was still His decision to create them this way. You all must be pretty dirty if you find something wrong with a beaver. And about the platypus controversy, they're AUSTRALIAN, not Austrian, and they use their bills to dig in the sand. And animals can't sin, they don't have immortal souls anyways. (Proverbs 12:10, Genesis 1:30, Genesis 1:21, James 3:7)

Mr. Comatose,

God Created the platypus (Genesis 1:24). You are right: it is a soulless automaton (Genesis 1:28), a beast. However, God did not Create it to be a sand-digger but an aquatic animal (due to which some consider that it might have been Created as early as Genesis 1:20 but as it is an air-breather, leading Creation Scientists find it more plausible that Genesis 1:24 includes Ornithorhyncus anatinus). Actually, God Created its bill with electroreception that is useful in the Alpine murky Austrian waters, not sand-digging. It is to locate prey. Please, do check your information before posting, as your failures to understand the very basics of Creation Science do not make your credentials regarding Scripture very plausible.

http://www.skewsme.com/img/platypus-reception-2.jpg

Platypuses were also present as an Ark Kind during the Flood (Genesis 7:21-22) although some Creation Scholars have argued that as an aquatic Mosaic Created Kind it might have survived the floodwaters also being freely pelagic. I'm sure this will be resolved in no time. However, things changed after the Flood with Genetic Entropy. The platypus could not actually sin but that doesn't mean it would have been unaffected by the sin of the first woman (Genesis 3:6). On the contrary, all Creatures suffer from degeneration because of the sin. Thus, sin is an integral part of the platypus's state of existence. This is also clearly stated in the Bible:

Romans 8:22
For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

Platypus is among "the Whole Creation", hence, it is affected. And sin can accumulate in various places, also as memes. These memes can be attached to animals as names or evil entities and cause irrevocable damage on the Creatures that matter: men with corruptible souls.

This is no joking matter. Children and adolescents may start experimenting with unnatural sexual acts because they are lured by these Creatures that are also Corrupted as seen in the verse above.

Please do not play with matters that you do not understand!

:repent:


Yours in Christ,

Elmer :bye:

Comatoserocker 05-28-2016 04:19 PM

Re: WARNING! Extreme sexual content - animals that should be banned and avoided by Christians at all cost.
 
Ok, I admit, I don't know that much about platypuses (or whatever the plural form is) Still, they're one of my favorite animals, in my opinion they're pretty cute, and one of God's more fascinating creations. I mean, it's an egg-laying mammal with a duck bill and a beaver tail! God probably had a heap of fun creating this one. And about the meme problem, it's just the work of humans. Not God's work, so it's not much to worry about. If you want some good memes with nothing sexual, go to cleanmemes.com for a good, clean laugh. But I do understand that God loves all of His creations (aside from Satan and the Devils) I've already looked, but if you search up "bible verses about gods love kjv" on google or whatever search engine, then you could find numerous examples. At the end of the day, animals won't really matter, because us humans will either be in heaven or hell, and the animals...I don't really know, but God sends them somewhere I suppose.He gave created animals for humans to enjoy them, so why not do that? Don't run away from them, fearing that they're perverted or sexual, but instead, just enjoy them.


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:29 AM.

Powered by Jesus - vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Landover Baptist Forums 1620, 2018 all rights reserved