By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Sarah Palin FTW!!!

The Ghost of RubangB on 04 September 2008
appolose said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
appolose said:
Paul said:
akuma587 said:
appolose said:

 

@ bold

Actually, that's the point I'm making; that's what your method would inevitably lead to.

And I'm not saying the Bible is a legal document, I was just pointing out the inconsistencies that can arise between what Obama says and the Bible says (and whatever else I had been saying).

Any Christian who believes everything in the Bible believes that pi is 3.00, that every animal on earth (including every parasite, and every insect species we have YET to discover) fit onto one boat, that people can live for over 700 years, and that demons constantly infect people.

So if Obama doesn't believe in all those things he is not a good Christian?  Your inconsistencies are greater than mine.  The point is that a person's Christian beliefs and their social policy do not have to be the same, and probably shouldn't be.  They should follow social policies that they think are best for the country, not just themselves.

 

The guy has a Jesus riding a dinosaur avatar, this is an argument you aren't going to win. The world is only 5000 years old you know.

 

 

6000

Anyways, if Obama contradicts the Bible, then, by definition, he is not a Christian; that is, as the only place he can get the idea that Jesus was crucified and that that forgives him of all his sins is from the Bible, contradicting any other part of the Bible would invalidate his profession of his belief in Christ (which, he got from the Bible). 

Again, my point isn't that we should be using the Bible as the source of governmental workings, my point is that, by definition, Obama is not a Christian.

Futhermore, you contradict yourself by saying that a person should follow the society's feeling of what is moral and by saying that previous majority's beliefs were immoral.  I gave the example of majority choices that you would disagree with (and would rebel against, I imagine) then say we should follow the majority anyway.  And why should they follow the majority, anyway?  Who decided that, the majority?

Finally, no, the Bible doesn't equate pi to be 3 (yes, I know what passage you're referring to), why would a parasite take up much room on the ark, and it wasn't a pair of every species, it was a pair of every kind (but that's a different argument).


Is there only one type of Christian?

I just took the quiz in your sig, and it lists 9 types of theologians, and grades me on all 9.

Is everybody who takes the quiz a Christian, or only if they get the same exact score as you?

 

You are a Christian if you believe that Jesus died for... well, you know the rest.  Again, I'm saying that Obama, having derived his belief in Christ from the Bible, cannot contradict the Bible, as that would invalidate his supposed belief in Christianity.  If he can't believe it, then he can't believe in Jesus.  That is just the logic of it.

What theology did you get?

 

So what if I believe that Jesus is the way the truth and the light and there is no way to Heaven but through Him, but I don't believe in the Garden of Eden and the snake and the apple and the Ark and all that jazz?

I got 96% Emergent/Postmodern, all the way down to 0% Fundamentalist.

The test wasn't really relevant to me though.  A lot of the questions I would've opted out of if I could.



twitter.com/evaneldeneller

Sunday Fundays

Around the Network
fkusumot on 04 September 2008
HappySqurriel said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
bigjon, the Bible myth is in several other religions around that time period. Just as several other religions around that time had virgin mothers give birth to their messiahs. They were all ripping each other off. And once the Romans got their hands on Christianity, they molded it to fit their political whims even more.

Actually, most scholars believe that the Bible (and similar religious texts) are based on folk-tales which were (in most cases) based on real people and real events ... This doesn't mean that what is in the Bible should be considered literal fact, but you shouldn't dismiss it as simply being "myths" either.

So you think that the word "myth" is being used here in a pejorative sense? I believe Rubang specifically refers to the particular story which in the bible is the story of the immaculate conception. Are you also referring to that as one of the folk-tales that was based on a real event?



I Blame Wii Fit!

HappySqurriel on 04 September 2008
fkusumot said:
HappySqurriel said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
bigjon, the Bible myth is in several other religions around that time period. Just as several other religions around that time had virgin mothers give birth to their messiahs. They were all ripping each other off. And once the Romans got their hands on Christianity, they molded it to fit their political whims even more.

Actually, most scholars believe that the Bible (and similar religious texts) are based on folk-tales which were (in most cases) based on real people and real events ... This doesn't mean that what is in the Bible should be considered literal fact, but you shouldn't dismiss it as simply being "myths" either.

So you think that the word "myth" is being used here in a pejorative sense? I believe Rubang specifically refers to the particular story which in the bible is the story of the immaculate conception. Are you also referring to that as one of the folk-tales that was based on a real event?

From a biological perspective, immaculate conception is not an impossibility ... Hypothetically speaking, it would require an egg to contain both sets of chromosones or two eggs to join; and the child would most likely be a girl unless the mother suffered from Klinefelter's syndrome. It is amazingly unlikely, but it is still possible

 



appolose on 04 September 2008
The Ghost of RubangB said:
appolose said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
appolose said:
Paul said:
akuma587 said:
appolose said:

 

@ bold

Actually, that's the point I'm making; that's what your method would inevitably lead to.

And I'm not saying the Bible is a legal document, I was just pointing out the inconsistencies that can arise between what Obama says and the Bible says (and whatever else I had been saying).

Any Christian who believes everything in the Bible believes that pi is 3.00, that every animal on earth (including every parasite, and every insect species we have YET to discover) fit onto one boat, that people can live for over 700 years, and that demons constantly infect people.

So if Obama doesn't believe in all those things he is not a good Christian?  Your inconsistencies are greater than mine.  The point is that a person's Christian beliefs and their social policy do not have to be the same, and probably shouldn't be.  They should follow social policies that they think are best for the country, not just themselves.

 

The guy has a Jesus riding a dinosaur avatar, this is an argument you aren't going to win. The world is only 5000 years old you know.

 

 

6000

Anyways, if Obama contradicts the Bible, then, by definition, he is not a Christian; that is, as the only place he can get the idea that Jesus was crucified and that that forgives him of all his sins is from the Bible, contradicting any other part of the Bible would invalidate his profession of his belief in Christ (which, he got from the Bible). 

Again, my point isn't that we should be using the Bible as the source of governmental workings, my point is that, by definition, Obama is not a Christian.

Futhermore, you contradict yourself by saying that a person should follow the society's feeling of what is moral and by saying that previous majority's beliefs were immoral.  I gave the example of majority choices that you would disagree with (and would rebel against, I imagine) then say we should follow the majority anyway.  And why should they follow the majority, anyway?  Who decided that, the majority?

Finally, no, the Bible doesn't equate pi to be 3 (yes, I know what passage you're referring to), why would a parasite take up much room on the ark, and it wasn't a pair of every species, it was a pair of every kind (but that's a different argument).


Is there only one type of Christian?

I just took the quiz in your sig, and it lists 9 types of theologians, and grades me on all 9.

Is everybody who takes the quiz a Christian, or only if they get the same exact score as you?

 

You are a Christian if you believe that Jesus died for... well, you know the rest.  Again, I'm saying that Obama, having derived his belief in Christ from the Bible, cannot contradict the Bible, as that would invalidate his supposed belief in Christianity.  If he can't believe it, then he can't believe in Jesus.  That is just the logic of it.

What theology did you get?

 

So what if I believe that Jesus is the way the truth and the light and there is no way to Heaven but through Him, but I don't believe in the Garden of Eden and the snake and the apple and the Ark and all that jazz?

I got 96% Emergent/Postmodern, all the way down to 0% Fundamentalist.

The test wasn't really relevant to me though.  A lot of the questions I would've opted out of if I could.

Because the only source for your belief in Jesus is from the Bible.  If you dismiss the Bible, you inevitably dismiss a belief in Jesus.

I got Wesleyan as my most (can't remember the percentage).  There were a couple of question I could have done without, too.

 

 



Okami

To lavish praise upon this title, the assumption of a common plateau between player and game must be made.  I won't open my unworthy mouth.

Christian (+50).  Arminian(+20). AG adherent(+20). YEC(+20). Pre-tribulation Pre-milleniumist (+10).  Republican (+15) Capitalist (+15).  Pro-Nintendo (+5).  Misc. stances (+30).  TOTAL SCORE: 195
  http://quizfarm.com/test.php?q_id=43870 <---- Fun theology quiz
Paul on 04 September 2008
appolose said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
appolose said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
appolose said:
Paul said:
akuma587 said:
appolose said:
 

 

@ bold

Actually, that's the point I'm making; that's what your method would inevitably lead to.

And I'm not saying the Bible is a legal document, I was just pointing out the inconsistencies that can arise between what Obama says and the Bible says (and whatever else I had been saying).

Any Christian who believes everything in the Bible believes that pi is 3.00, that every animal on earth (including every parasite, and every insect species we have YET to discover) fit onto one boat, that people can live for over 700 years, and that demons constantly infect people.

So if Obama doesn't believe in all those things he is not a good Christian?  Your inconsistencies are greater than mine.  The point is that a person's Christian beliefs and their social policy do not have to be the same, and probably shouldn't be.  They should follow social policies that they think are best for the country, not just themselves.

 

The guy has a Jesus riding a dinosaur avatar, this is an argument you aren't going to win. The world is only 5000 years old you know.

 

 

6000

Anyways, if Obama contradicts the Bible, then, by definition, he is not a Christian; that is, as the only place he can get the idea that Jesus was crucified and that that forgives him of all his sins is from the Bible, contradicting any other part of the Bible would invalidate his profession of his belief in Christ (which, he got from the Bible). 

Again, my point isn't that we should be using the Bible as the source of governmental workings, my point is that, by definition, Obama is not a Christian.

Futhermore, you contradict yourself by saying that a person should follow the society's feeling of what is moral and by saying that previous majority's beliefs were immoral.  I gave the example of majority choices that you would disagree with (and would rebel against, I imagine) then say we should follow the majority anyway.  And why should they follow the majority, anyway?  Who decided that, the majority?

Finally, no, the Bible doesn't equate pi to be 3 (yes, I know what passage you're referring to), why would a parasite take up much room on the ark, and it wasn't a pair of every species, it was a pair of every kind (but that's a different argument).


Is there only one type of Christian?

I just took the quiz in your sig, and it lists 9 types of theologians, and grades me on all 9.

Is everybody who takes the quiz a Christian, or only if they get the same exact score as you?

 

You are a Christian if you believe that Jesus died for... well, you know the rest.  Again, I'm saying that Obama, having derived his belief in Christ from the Bible, cannot contradict the Bible, as that would invalidate his supposed belief in Christianity.  If he can't believe it, then he can't believe in Jesus.  That is just the logic of it.

What theology did you get?

 

So what if I believe that Jesus is the way the truth and the light and there is no way to Heaven but through Him, but I don't believe in the Garden of Eden and the snake and the apple and the Ark and all that jazz?

I got 96% Emergent/Postmodern, all the way down to 0% Fundamentalist.

The test wasn't really relevant to me though.  A lot of the questions I would've opted out of if I could.

Because the only source for your belief in Jesus is from the Bible.  If you dismiss the Bible, you inevitably dismiss a belief in Jesus.

I got Wesleyan as my most (can't remember the percentage).  There were a couple of question I could have done without, too.

 

 

I tried to get through your quiz but just couldn't do it. I would say I'm 99% atheist and 1% agnostic.

 

 



Around the Network
fkusumot on 04 September 2008
HappySqurriel said:

From a biological perspective, immaculate conception is not an impossibility ... Hypothetically speaking, it would require an egg to contain both sets of chromosones or two eggs to join; and the child would most likely be a girl unless the mother suffered from Klinefelter's syndrome. It is amazingly unlikely, but it is still possible

So is this where we tie it back in with Bristol and the folklore begins again!



I Blame Wii Fit!

appolose on 04 September 2008
Paul said:
appolose said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
appolose said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
appolose said:
Paul said:
akuma587 said:
appolose said:

 

@ bold

Actually, that's the point I'm making; that's what your method would inevitably lead to.

And I'm not saying the Bible is a legal document, I was just pointing out the inconsistencies that can arise between what Obama says and the Bible says (and whatever else I had been saying).

Any Christian who believes everything in the Bible believes that pi is 3.00, that every animal on earth (including every parasite, and every insect species we have YET to discover) fit onto one boat, that people can live for over 700 years, and that demons constantly infect people.

So if Obama doesn't believe in all those things he is not a good Christian?  Your inconsistencies are greater than mine.  The point is that a person's Christian beliefs and their social policy do not have to be the same, and probably shouldn't be.  They should follow social policies that they think are best for the country, not just themselves.

 

The guy has a Jesus riding a dinosaur avatar, this is an argument you aren't going to win. The world is only 5000 years old you know.

 

 

6000

Anyways, if Obama contradicts the Bible, then, by definition, he is not a Christian; that is, as the only place he can get the idea that Jesus was crucified and that that forgives him of all his sins is from the Bible, contradicting any other part of the Bible would invalidate his profession of his belief in Christ (which, he got from the Bible). 

Again, my point isn't that we should be using the Bible as the source of governmental workings, my point is that, by definition, Obama is not a Christian.

Futhermore, you contradict yourself by saying that a person should follow the society's feeling of what is moral and by saying that previous majority's beliefs were immoral.  I gave the example of majority choices that you would disagree with (and would rebel against, I imagine) then say we should follow the majority anyway.  And why should they follow the majority, anyway?  Who decided that, the majority?

Finally, no, the Bible doesn't equate pi to be 3 (yes, I know what passage you're referring to), why would a parasite take up much room on the ark, and it wasn't a pair of every species, it was a pair of every kind (but that's a different argument).


Is there only one type of Christian?

I just took the quiz in your sig, and it lists 9 types of theologians, and grades me on all 9.

Is everybody who takes the quiz a Christian, or only if they get the same exact score as you?

 

You are a Christian if you believe that Jesus died for... well, you know the rest.  Again, I'm saying that Obama, having derived his belief in Christ from the Bible, cannot contradict the Bible, as that would invalidate his supposed belief in Christianity.  If he can't believe it, then he can't believe in Jesus.  That is just the logic of it.

What theology did you get?

 

So what if I believe that Jesus is the way the truth and the light and there is no way to Heaven but through Him, but I don't believe in the Garden of Eden and the snake and the apple and the Ark and all that jazz?

I got 96% Emergent/Postmodern, all the way down to 0% Fundamentalist.

The test wasn't really relevant to me though.  A lot of the questions I would've opted out of if I could.

Because the only source for your belief in Jesus is from the Bible.  If you dismiss the Bible, you inevitably dismiss a belief in Jesus.

I got Wesleyan as my most (can't remember the percentage).  There were a couple of question I could have done without, too.

 

 

I tried to get through your quiz but just couldn't do it. I would say I'm 99% atheist and 1% agnostic.

 

 

Ouch, 99% atheist?  That's worth millions of negative points on my sig's scale.  Millions.

 



Okami

To lavish praise upon this title, the assumption of a common plateau between player and game must be made.  I won't open my unworthy mouth.

Christian (+50).  Arminian(+20). AG adherent(+20). YEC(+20). Pre-tribulation Pre-milleniumist (+10).  Republican (+15) Capitalist (+15).  Pro-Nintendo (+5).  Misc. stances (+30).  TOTAL SCORE: 195
  http://quizfarm.com/test.php?q_id=43870 <---- Fun theology quiz
appolose on 04 September 2008

Wow, where'd everyone go?



Okami

To lavish praise upon this title, the assumption of a common plateau between player and game must be made.  I won't open my unworthy mouth.

Christian (+50).  Arminian(+20). AG adherent(+20). YEC(+20). Pre-tribulation Pre-milleniumist (+10).  Republican (+15) Capitalist (+15).  Pro-Nintendo (+5).  Misc. stances (+30).  TOTAL SCORE: 195
  http://quizfarm.com/test.php?q_id=43870 <---- Fun theology quiz
BenKenobi88 on 04 September 2008

This thread is boring.



LEFT4DEAD411.COM
Bet with disolitude: Left4Dead will have a higher Metacritic rating than Project Origin, 3 months after the second game's release.  (hasn't been 3 months but it looks like I won :-p )

Jackson50 on 04 September 2008

My highest percantage on that quiz was RC, but I did not receive a significant percantage of any of the options. I wished it would have given an Orthodox option. I am surprised it did not considering Orthodox is the 2nd largest Christian group in the world.