[Brother Temperance]

Originally Posted by joe707

What is the worst that can happen?

The worst that can happen is that God can send your soul to suffer unimaginable torments for eternity. That's like the longest time you can think of times a million. I'd say that's pretty bad.

Originally Posted by joe707

My first issue is with the literal word being the sole and exclusive claim on truth. You say the KJV1611 is indeed written by God. I tried in an earlier post to point out that this claim in itself is indefensible on grounds of logic alone. Faith must be involved that this is the case; some appeal to the heart or soul rather than the intellect. I personally don’t see a problem with this state of affairs; but then I am not in the business of making extraordinary claims!

Friend, God Himself is indefensible on grounds of logic alone. You just need to accept Him based on faith, or else be condemned to Hell for eternity.

[joe707]

Apologies if I overlooked these issues. I thought I had addressed them in more general terms, but ok, it seems a more specific treatment is warranted.

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

If you have the Bible and you trust it to be God's Word, then you have objective truth right there in front of you in black and white. We believe all of the Bible, even the parts that make us uncomfortable.

Then this is a conditional. ‘If..... then.....’ I am happy to accept conditionals as the basis for discussion. Your church chooses to trust in a specific version of a text as your source of knowledge. I wish you and your Pastors were more upfront and honest about this fact, rather than claiming exclusive rights on Gods word; the ultimate truth. And all the other stuff that goes with it, which then becomes distorted and manipulated for less than ‘holy’ (for wont of a better word) pursuits.

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

On the other end of the spectrum, you have scientists who use the scientific method on empirical data in an attempt to learn the truth. They believe what the evidence points to, even if it makes them uncomfortable.

Agreed, in theory. (Although surprisingly much scientific method is conducted via ‘non-rational’ methods, and much cherry-picking of empirical data is implicit in each and every scientific paradigm. As possibly you guys know and use to your best advantage, although I have yet to visit your creation science forum).

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

In the middle, you have liberal Christians who believe the parts of the Bible that say what they want to hear, disbelieving the rest, and they believe the findings of science that say what they want to hear, disbelieving the rest.

I am not hugely knowledgeable of ‘liberals’, as opposed to ‘fundamentalists’ as you might define them, but hey, I can happily take that on board, since you know far better than I what goes on in the Christian faith. It sounds entirely reasonable to me. Because selective uptake is something we all do. Even the godly amongst us (no doubt we will come to this very important matter soon!).

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

Liberal Christians are basically living in a fantasy world, believing whatever they want to believe, without a care as to whether what they believe is actually true.

Again, I won’t comment on these matters, as my views are personal and limited. But I can see the sentiment behind what you are saying. Both you and Pastor Pistle clearly feel a deep sense of sadness for the state of degeneration that you witness, and an unwillingness to sit by the sidelines without taking action. And I honestly understand that.

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

Even if they did care, they have no tools for determining what is true or false.

Well I suspect that they do, but those tools, in the form of subjective statements about things, clearly can not be subjected to scientific verification, or (perhaps more importantly) verification through the word of the Bible. But no matter, because all of these are incomplete and inconsistent. (And like any tool, they do a job, sometimes well, sometimes not so well.)

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

Fundamentalists have an inerrant text, and scientists have empirical methods, but liberal Christians have nothing.

I think you are wrong about the first claim, but maybe I don't know what is meant by ‘inerrant’.

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

Therefore, the only objective forms of belief are science and fundamentalism, and since we all know that scientists are all working for the Devil, that leaves fundamentalism as the only viable option.

Scientists working for the Devil? Hmmm. But as per your point above – I don’t think fundamentalists have an inerrant text, if by that you mean 1) it does not need interpretation, and 2) that it is total, i.e. complete in knowledge. Shall we agree that naturally we both are now referring to the KJV1611 POV? Because I couldn't help but notice a few bunches of other fundamentalists both here and across the waters who also claim the divinity of an inerrant text

Btw, I wouldn't presume in any way to be as knowledgeable as you of the KJV1611, I am new to it.

[joe707]

Originally Posted by Brother Temperance

The worst that can happen is that God can send your soul to suffer unimaginable torments for eternity. That's like the longest time you can think of times a million. I'd say that's pretty bad.

Yes, I would too. In fact, if you are ever lucky or unlucky enough to perceive eternity, then you might know that all accumulated ideas of numbers, and concepts of time become nonsense. I hope you come to it in favorable circumstances.

Originally Posted by Brother Temperance

Friend, God Himself is indefensible on grounds of logic alone.

Quite.

Originally Posted by Brother Temperance

You just need to accept Him based on faith, or else be condemned to Hell for eternity.

More needed. Specifically to do with faith. Your faith.

Thanks.

[Pastor Al E Pistle]

Originally Posted by joe707

More needed. Specifically to do with faith. Your faith.
Thanks.

And that, in the final analysis, is the crux of the debate. Is our Bible, one of dozens, the ONE inerrant one? I don't know that, Joe. Does GOD Himself deceive people so they will go to HELL? Yes.

1 Kings 22:23
Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee.

2 Chronicles 18:22
Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets.
Jeremiah 4:10
Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people.
Jeremiah 20:7
O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived.
Ezekiel 14:9
And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet.
2 Thessalonians 2:11
For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.

Are we they? We certainly don't believe so. Theologians have identified gross errors of conduct and intentional falsifications in the Bible and in organized religion for many hundreds of years. I needn't point fingers, but the catholics milked religion for all they could, and are still doing it. The Jews don't believe JESUS was their anointed leader, so now they are standing back-to-back in a desert with wolves at all the doors.

But we can trace our heritage as a church inside the walls of King James of England whose scribes rendered what we believe was the final and divinely corrected version of the Bible. We certainly don't believe Joseph Smith's account of the golden tablets, nor does anyone doubt his pedophelia, or that of Mohammed (who claimed his visions were from SATAN...that observation is obviously true).

What can I tell you Joe? When you are shooting for eternity and it's an open Book test, you better be able to pass and you better have confidence that you have the right book. So we aren't wishy-washy. If someone comes in here for the purpose of making an idiot of themselves, we are unabashed in helping them. If someone wants to discuss our beliefs intelligently, we can do that too. All of our Pastors can, and will.

But since PBR and I engaged you first, we get the courtesy of responding to you. That's why there are not myriad responses; you would be overwhelmed or something would get lost in translation.

When I have to return to Landover at the end of the week, I shall hand you off to someone who will be happy to continue a one-on-one. Naturally it is always best if the original Pastor carries the discussion to it's conclusion, but it isn't really necessary. The person who happens to be on duty at the time I leave will be handed the task for better or worse.

He won't sound like me and might well be less tolerant of opposing viewpoints. Everyone is different after all. But he will understand the Bible and our beliefs...in fact, we have several Sisters who could easily be handling calls instead of a Pastor. If that is the case, SHE will continue for me.

As for your request about our beliefs, that was answered earlier. I am an elderly gentleman (if you will give me the courtesy of that title) and I am less argumentative in my dotage than many years ago. So I am actually presenting responses as a philosopher might...not those really appropriate for a Pastor of our church. But I am a Senior Pastor and I allow myself the latitude. Do not take that as wavering in my faith. I am simply more willing to accommodate your questions because you phrase them eruditely and politely...and I sometimes let my thoughts wander a bit.

[Pastor Billy-Reuben]

Originally Posted by joe707

to claim any text as the word of God means that (a) interpretation will be necessary. I know how strongly you oppose this, but given the obvious imprecisions inherent with word meaning I think it is the most likely outcome. And (b) that such a text is not fully comprehensive or exhaustive, so naturally some human behavior will neither conform to nor fall foul of the word; a ‘gray’ area.

I don't see how those conclusions follow from an assertion that a book is the Word of God. If a book had been written by a being that deserves to be referred to as God, then I would expect that book to be perfect, devoid of any problems, especially the types of problems you mentioned.

(a) Writers strive for clarity. If a book had been written by an Almighty God, then we would rightly expect that book to be the most unambiguous, clearly presented, and easy to understand book ever written, by far. Books written by men are unclear and ambiguous.

(b) An Omniscient God knows everything. If book that tells people how they should live their lives had been written by an Omniscient God, then we would rightly expect that book to cover any circumstance and to not leave any gray area. Books written by men miss unforeseen circumstances and leave gray areas.

Pastor Billy-Reuben

[joe707]

Originally Posted by Pastor Al E Pistle

And that, in the final analysis, is the crux of the debate. Is our Bible, one of dozens, the ONE inerrant one? I don't know that, Joe. Does GOD Himself deceive people so they will go to HELL? Yes.

1 Kings 22:23
Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee.

2 Chronicles 18:22
Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets.
Jeremiah 4:10
Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people.
Jeremiah 20:7
O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived.
Ezekiel 14:9
And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet.
2 Thessalonians 2:11
For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.

To be sure, deception – either intentional or unseen – is something against which we all should be extremely vigilant.

Originally Posted by Pastor Al E Pistle

Are we they? We certainly don't believe so. Theologians have identified gross errors of conduct and intentional falsifications in the Bible and in organized religion for many hundreds of years. I needn't point fingers, but the catholics milked religion for all they could, and are still doing it. The Jews don't believe JESUS was their anointed leader, so now they are standing back-to-back in a desert with wolves at all the doors.

But we can trace our heritage as a church inside the walls of King James of England whose scribes rendered what we believe was the final and divinely corrected version of the Bible. We certainly don't believe Joseph Smith's account of the golden tablets, nor does anyone doubt his pedophelia, or that of Mohammed (who claimed his visions were from SATAN...that observation is obviously true).

What can I tell you Joe? When you are shooting for eternity and it's an open Book test, you better be able to pass and you better have confidence that you have the right book. So we aren't wishy-washy. If someone comes in here for the purpose of making an idiot of themselves, we are unabashed in helping them. If someone wants to discuss our beliefs intelligently, we can do that too. All of our Pastors can, and will.

As I can see and appreciate has happened in places. But you know, eternity is rather a big deal. How can it exist only as some promise of a future event? Does it not then cease to be eternal; but become something far lesser entirely, since it denies all that took place in time before it?

Originally Posted by Pastor Al E Pistle

But since PBR and I engaged you first, we get the courtesy of responding to you. That's why there are not myriad responses; you would be overwhelmed or something would get lost in translation.

I am willing to be overwhelmed, if need be.

Originally Posted by Pastor Al E Pistle

When I have to return to Landover at the end of the week, I shall hand you off to someone who will be happy to continue a one-on-one. Naturally it is always best if the original Pastor carries the discussion to it's conclusion, but it isn't really necessary. The person who happens to be on duty at the time I leave will be handed the task for better or worse.

He won't sound like me and might well be less tolerant of opposing viewpoints. Everyone is different after all. But he will understand the Bible and our beliefs...in fact, we have several Sisters who could easily be handling calls instead of a Pastor. If that is the case, SHE will continue for me.

As for your request about our beliefs, that was answered earlier.

Yes, you did answer that. Thankyou.

Originally Posted by Pastor Al E Pistle

I am an elderly gentleman (if you will give me the courtesy of that title) and I am less argumentative in my dotage than many years ago.

A little disingenuous perhaps here Pastor?

Originally Posted by Pastor Al E Pistle

So I am actually presenting responses as a philosopher might...not those really appropriate for a Pastor of our church. But I am a Senior Pastor and I allow myself the latitude. Do not take that as wavering in my faith. I am simply more willing to accommodate your questions because you phrase them eruditely and politely...and I sometimes let my thoughts wander a bit.

Your latitude does you credit, wandering thoughts, uncertainty and all. Pastor, in another time and place, I imagine we might have continued these discussions over a beer or two. Stranger things have happened in creation, after all.

[joe707]

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

I don't see how those conclusions follow from an assertion that a book is the Word of God. If a book had been written by a being that deserves to be referred to as God, then I would expect that book to be perfect, devoid of any problems, especially the types of problems you mentioned.

Well, me too. I’d want to be pretty scrupulous in determining that there is no room for error. Which is why someone needs to account for the incompleteness and woolly statements littered thoughout the Bible.

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

(a) Writers strive for clarity. If a book had been written by an Almighty God, then we would rightly expect that book to be the most unambiguous, clearly presented, and easy to understand book ever written, by far. Books written by men are unclear and ambiguous.

Indeed. Could you explain the following passages? As mentioned earlier, my knowledge of the KJV1611 is not by any means scholarly at this point in time.

Proverbs 25:23 The north wind driveth away rain: so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue.

Deuteronomy 23:17&18 There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the LORD thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

Deuteronomy 32:42 I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh; and that with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the beginning of revenges upon the enemy.

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

(b) An Omniscient God knows everything. If book that tells people how they should live their lives had been written by an Omniscient God, then we would rightly expect that book to cover any circumstance and to not leave any gray area. Books written by men miss unforeseen circumstances and leave gray areas.

Agreed. So what TV programs does God demand we watch, and which of those will damn us to hell?

[Pastor Al E Pistle]

Originally Posted by joe707

To be sure, deception – either intentional or unseen – is something against which we all should be extremely vigilant.

You see then why we must insist that the Unsaved are Unwelcome in our Holy place.

As I can see and appreciate has happened in places. But you know, eternity is rather a big deal. How can it exist only as some promise of a future event? Does it not then cease to be eternal; but become something far lesser entirely, since it denies all that took place in time before it?

Joe, I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today. But all must tithe to the Greater Glory of God in this life and have faith that what the Pastors tell the flock is true. There is a reason JESUS represented Himself as a shepherd. We cannot control or even know the day of JESUS' return but we are fully committed to spreading His literal word far and wide so that a worse fate should not befall those who grasp the TRUE meaning and intent of the Bible. Won't you join us Joe? Take Pascal's wager. You have nothing to lose but eternity.

I am willing to be overwhelmed, if need be.

We don't want to overwhelm you. We simply ask that you see the Light.

Yes, you did answer that. Thankyou.

My pleasure!

A little disingenuous perhaps here Pastor?

Not at all. It is a very old photo. I am easily the eldest Pastor left at Landover.


Your latitude does you credit, wandering thoughts, uncertainty and all. Pastor, in another time and place, I imagine we might have continued these discussions over a beer or two. Stranger things have happened in creation, after all.

Jesus made water from wine. I occasionally enjoy a 'brewski' with friends, but I don't have too many of either out here at Landover West. The polyglot of catholics, witches and hula dancers combine to make my life miserable most of the time.

It is my understanding that Landover Productions is considering our conversation as the basis for one of our radio shows. Drop back on occasion to see when it will air.

a hui hou, Joe.
Pastor Al

[Pastor Billy-Reuben]

Originally Posted by joe707

Well, me too. I’d want to be pretty scrupulous in determining that there is no room for error. Which is why someone needs to account for the incompleteness and woolly statements littered thoughout the Bible.

I'm going to have to ask you for some examples, because I've read the Bible dozens of times and have found no incompleteness nor any woolly statements. Granted, some verses, when removed from the surrounding context, may be confusing, but everything makes perfect sense when you read the whole book.

Originally Posted by joe707

Indeed. Could you explain the following passages? As mentioned earlier, my knowledge of the KJV1611 is not by any means scholarly at this point in time.

I don't want to call your intelligence into question, but the passages you cited seem pretty straightforward to me.

Originally Posted by joe707

Proverbs 25:23 The north wind driveth away rain: so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue.

If someone comes up to you to share a juicy bit of gossip, and you scowl at them for doing so, they'll shut up about it.

Originally Posted by joe707

Deuteronomy 23:17&18 There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the LORD thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

Priests at nearby heathen temples were basically pimps. They had temple prostitutes who turned their earnings into the priest. Here, God is forbidding those kind of shenanigans at His churches.

Originally Posted by joe707

Deuteronomy 32:42 I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh; and that with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the beginning of revenges upon the enemy.

The Israelites were about to invade the promised land. Here, God is promising to kill all the bad-guys.

Originally Posted by joe707

Agreed. So what TV programs does God demand we watch, and which of those will damn us to hell?

The answer to that question is as close as your nearest King James Bible.

A saved Christian whose faith is strong won't be damned to hell for watching a TV show, however I can't imagine such a person wanting to watch a show that glorifies sin. A newly-saved Christian should avoid anything that weakens his faith and causes him to stumble, and a stronger Christian should avoid exposing weaker Christians to such things.

1Thess 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
1Thess 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.

Rom 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

Pastor Billy-Reuben

[joe707]

Originally Posted by Pastor Al E Pistle

Jesus made water from wine. I occasionally enjoy a 'brewski' with friends, but I don't have too many of either out here at Landover West. The polyglot of catholics, witches and hula dancers combine to make my life miserable most of the time.

It is my understanding that Landover Productions is considering our conversation as the basis for one of our radio shows. Drop back on occasion to see when it will air.

a hui hou, Joe.
Pastor Al

Landover Productions? That’s an intriguing idea, and slightly strange, but I am all ears.

I have to say Pascal’s wager seemed a ridiculous way to approach such serious matters when I first saw it, and remains so for me.

Re: hamburgers – would you put your faith in someone who approached your house daily to demand hamburgers, and paid you nothing? Would you trust someone who promised only future payment, in a timescale that you were utterly unable to comprehend in mortal life, knowing full well the crippling pain that that hope and fear brought you?

[joe707]

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

I'm going to have to ask you for some examples, because I've read the Bible dozens of times and have found no incompleteness nor any woolly statements. Granted, some verses, when removed from the surrounding context, may be confusing, but everything makes perfect sense when you read the whole book.

It is incomplete simply because - being time-bound - it can not accommodate every future scenario. God may not change but the world does. The KJV1611 Bible may be sufficient to provide general guidelines – guidelines that need some interpretation, as you have given with the TV example below. Why did God not tell his people specifically what TV programs to watch? Two possible reasons I can think of: (1) it is an oversight; one of many. Or, (2) his Creation is complete in every way, therefore TV is not part of his Creation. So all the more important that we should specifically be warned against it, don't you think? And without having to rely on men (imperfect beings) interpreting/extrapolating (imperfect modes of reason) from a set of general rules (imperfect laws) on my behalf. I don't want to be gravely mislead, after all.

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

If someone comes up to you to share a juicy bit of gossip, and you scowl at them for doing so, they'll shut up about it.

So it's not talking about a medical condition of the tongue? A ‘backbiting tongue’ is really a metaphor for gossip?

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

Priests at nearby heathen temples were basically pimps. They had temple prostitutes who turned their earnings into the priest. Here, God is forbidding those kind of shenanigans at His churches.

Including, presumably, the price of a dog being brought in? He can’t mean homosexual prostitutes, otherwise He would have said homosexual prostitutes. Why does God want to deceive me?

Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben

The Israelites were about to invade the promised land. Here, God is promising to kill all the bad-guys.

Talk of arrows being drunk with blood? Sounds like another metaphor here. Some would say that all this language is metaphorical. Others would even say that it is mythopoetic, requiring tools of interpretation and imagination to extract meaning beyond the literal. Just like other texts. But LBC doctrine specifically denies this.

[Pastor Billy-Reuben]

Originally Posted by joe707

I have to say Pascal’s wager seemed a ridiculous way to approach such serious matters when I first saw it, and remains so for me

I have written a larger exposition of Pascal's wager here: Game Theory: Which Faith Gives the Best Payout?

Perhaps you will have a different view after reading that.

Originally Posted by joe707

Two possible reasons I can think of: (1) it is an oversight; one of many. Or, (2) his Creation is complete in every way, therefore TV is not part of his Creation.

How about (3) The Bible gives us enough information that a saved Christian who has read the Bible can tell whether a particular TV show glorifies sin. Anything that glorifies sin is sin, including certain TV shows, so there is no need to list individual TV shows. Besides which, if God went ahead and described each and every future TV show, it would rob the writers of their free will.

Originally Posted by joe707

So it's not talking about a medical condition of the tongue? A ‘backbiting tongue’ is really a metaphor for gossip?

It isn't a metaphor at all. It's a synonym. If you aren't familiar with a word, look it up in the dictionary.

Backbiting: The act of slandering the absent; secret calumny. 2Cor.xii

So yes, you could say that if someone doesn't understand basic English or is too lazy to look up unfamiliar terms in the dictionary, then that person might need some outside help understanding the Bible. I suppose you got me there.

Originally Posted by joe707

Including, presumably, the price of a dog being brought in? He can’t mean homosexual prostitutes, otherwise He would have said homosexual prostitutes.

Sorry, I skipped that part because the meaning should be obvious. Neither whore's wages nor animal sacrifices of dogs were acceptable offerings to God.

Originally Posted by joe707

Talk of arrows being drunk with blood? Sounds like another metaphor here.

No, that's not a metaphor either. The word "drunk" has multiple senses. The second sense of the word "drunk" is "Drenched or saturated with moisture or liquor."

Pastor Billy-Reuben

[joe707]

Good point about the free will of TV writers (although it would only rob them of their free will if they were already cognizant of scripture?) What I wanted say here though, is that even the LBC cannot have recourse to completely literal interpretations of the Bible without these problems of interpretation.

See, I was pretty sure Deuteronomy 23:18 referred to homosexual prostitutes, using the linguistic traditions of the day, rather than dog sacrifices (or even the price of dogs, which is actually the literal reading for some). That, to me, would be consistent with the semantics of other passages of the KJV1611. And I bet we both could endlessly debate whether stone or metallic arrowheads were actually permeable to liquid. But let’s not, perhaps I got these wrong!

There are other passages far more crucial, far more devastating even, where semantics are concerned. You and I might read them differently. The problem with any natural language is that meaning is not precise – that’s why the rules for a perfectly precise language end up being formulated in predicate logic. But then, what has predicate logic to do with truth anyway? You know how it is; some things you read with the eyes and the mind, and some things you have to read with the soul. Ha ha!

Anyhoo, I hope we can set aside matters of semantics and logic for a bit. I am much more interested in the real meat and bones of the issue, and these are but appetizers. Brother Temperance knows this is important stuff.

Originally Posted by Brother Temperance

Friend, God Himself is indefensible on grounds of logic alone. You just need to accept Him based on faith.....

I will try and look at your Pascal’s wager link soonish.

Thanks Pastor.

[Pastor Al E Pistle]

Originally Posted by joe707

Landover Productions? That’s an intriguing idea, and slightly strange, but I am all ears.

There is nothing strange about it.

I have to say Pascal’s wager seemed a ridiculous way to approach such serious matters when I first saw it, and remains so for me.

I refer you to Pastor Billy-Reuben for absolutely the last word on that subject.

Re: hamburgers – would you put your faith in someone who approached your house daily to demand hamburgers, and paid you nothing?

Believe me Joe, I'd be thrilled if some of the people who demand payments from me on what seems a daily basis would take hamburgers instead. I'd give them hamburgers they would never forget.

Would you trust someone who promised only future payment, in a timescale that you were utterly unable to comprehend in mortal life, knowing full well the crippling pain that that hope and fear brought you?

I might not, Joe. But 78% of Good Christian Americans will. It's that last twenty-two percent we are after. The ones who grow up to be scientists. Being a scientist means your life is a failure and you get buried in socks that don't match and a pocket protector.

[joe707]

Originally Posted by Pastor Al E Pistle

I might not, Joe. But 78% of Good Christian Americans will. It's that last twenty-two percent we are after. The ones who grow up to be scientists. Being a scientist means your life is a failure and you get buried in socks that don't match and a pocket protector.

Ha! I hope you find a matching pair of socks for your trip. Customs on the mainland can be quite harsh on that kind of thing coming from the outposts.