JESUS said

[King Jesus]

For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.

John 9:39

[Minister of Truth]

I am come?

[King Jesus]

In 1603, King James of England convened a conference in the Hampton Court to translate the Bible because the leaders of the church desired a Bible for the people.

The new translation was first published in 1611 and at first was called the Authorized Version, because it was authorized to be read in the churches. It is now known as the King James Version.

King James approved 54 scholars to work on the translation, and 47 worked in six groups at three locations for seven years, referring to previous English translations (such as the Geneva Bible) and texts in the original languages.

Because of the the care and attention to detail during this seven-year effort, the King James Bible was considered one of the most accurate translations in existence.

The King James translation has had a huge influence on the English language.

As the English language evolved, the grammar and wording was updated in 1769 to be more easily read for that time.

That is why the wording may seem odd to you.

Be blessed, my friend.

[DamnYankee]

"We have no King but Jesus!"

Battle cry of American Patriots descending on British troops, 1775.

[Canceled1]

I am come?

I don't know if that's a good thing for Jesus to admit in public...


Just sayin' :whoa:

[FUCK THE POLICE]

"We have no King but Jesus!"

Battle cry of American Patriots descending on British troops, 1775.

The treasonous scum was rightfully hung afterward, as well. Justice is done.

God save the King! Death to traitorous scum!

[Henerusic]

Kill yourself)

[Annie]

I'm like never here and yet the OP made me for the first time ever, reject an 'incoming friend request.' LOL! Be honest now, does he have more friends than posts?

[midcan5]

LOL - Come, follow me.....

http://www.jesusisaliberal.org/
http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/
http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=108

"With apologies to Natalie, I think there's a kind of a silliness to banging away at religious beliefs for their obvious falsehood, when in fact, if you're an evolutionist, the only way you would want to evaluate these beliefs is to examine what they cause people to do. Do they help people function in their communities? Then this might be an explanation for why they exist. It also makes it unnecessary to criticize these ideas, again and again, because they depart from factual reality. We should be more sophisticated in the way we evaluate beliefs." David Sloan Wilson

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/angier_wilson07/angier_wilson07.html


Amazon.com: Jesus Was a Liberal: How the Conservative Agenda Is a Rejection of Christ's Teachings (9780965761062): Jerry Wilde: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/4176AMJH05L.@@AMEPARAM@@4176AMJH05L (http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Was-Liberal-Conservative-Rejection/dp/0965761061/ref=pd_sim_b_1)
Amazon.com: Jesus Was a Liberal: Reclaiming Christianity for All (9780230614291): Scotty McLennan: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41ghb8ca1WL.@@AMEPARAM@@41ghb8ca1WL (http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Was-Liberal-Reclaiming-Christianity/dp/0230614299/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_b)
Amazon.com: Perfect Freedom: Why Liberal Christianity Might Be the Faith You're Looking For (9781905047185): Brian Mountford: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41PR2JJW61L.@@AMEPARAM@@41PR2JJW61L (http://www.amazon.com/Perfect-Freedom-Liberal-Christianity-Looking/dp/1905047185/ref=pd_sim_b_5)
Amazon.com: Why Jesus Would Never, Ever Vote Republican (9781419697593): Richard John Siviur: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51H0fFARkAL.@@AMEPARAM@@51H0fFARkAL (http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Would-Never-Ever-Republican/dp/1419697595/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8)

[Minister of Truth]

I prefer the Douay-Rheims to the King James.

[Cancel 2018. 3]

anyone who thinks jesus would be a democrat or a republican is a certified moron.

that is all.

[midcan5]

"If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered." Proverbs 21:13


anyone who thinks jesus would be a democrat or a republican is a certified moron.

that is all.

Anyone who thinks Jesus would not be a modern liberal is a certified moron.

That isn't all - anyone who thinks Jesus would be a modern day American conservative or libertarian is a certified moron.

Now that is all. Well almost all.

"Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy." Proverbs 31:8-9

the end

[Cancel 2018. 3]

hey dipshit, conservatives and republicans help the poor, you liberals don't own that, in fact i believe stats show the opposite...

you're full of shit if you think jesus would be a liberal, he would be against gay marriage...oh noes, now what stupidcan? see how stupid it is to try and make jesus belong to any one political group? no, you don't, you will do anything to give power to your failed political ideas, even using jesus....moron

you're a certified idiot to claim jesus would belong to any political idealogy

[Minister of Truth]

"If a man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor, he too will cry out and not be answered." Proverbs 21:13



Anyone who thinks Jesus would not be a modern liberal is a certified moron.

That isn't all - anyone who thinks Jesus would be a modern day American conservative or libertarian is a certified moron.

Now that is all. Well almost all.

"Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy." Proverbs 31:8-9

the end

Your right. Jesus would be high on crack 24/7, watching bondage porn, aborting babies right and left, complaining about other people's accomplishment's incessently, living on welfare, debating against His Father's existence, and those other highly Christian virtues of modern liberalism.

[Lowaicue]

[QUOTE=midcan5;773530]LOL - Come, follow me.....

"With apologies to Natalie, I think there's a kind of a silliness to banging away at religious beliefs for their obvious falsehood, when in fact, if you're an evolutionist, the only way you would want to evaluate these beliefs is to examine what they cause people to do. Do they help people function in their communities? Then this might be an explanation for why they exist. It also makes it unnecessary to criticize these ideas, again and again, because they depart from factual reality. We should be more sophisticated in the way we evaluate beliefs." David Sloan Wilson



I would agree in part with what Mr Wilson says, BUT whereas religion, or more accurately faith, is an undoubted help for many people and surely is a good thing for them, the overall idea is false and over time has caused more problems than it has solved.
The teaching of beliefs and faiths should be confined to the home and should never enter the realms of government or education. Fundementalism, of ALL hues, should be subject to official scrutiny and possibly prohibition.
If old Mrs Smith wishes to kneel at the foot of her bed every evening and pray to something that gives her peace and reason thats fine, but if her son wishes to blast his beliefs into the faces of those who have come to their senses, and will not desist when asked, then there should be some governance to handle it.
Here endeth the first lesson.

[DamnYankee]

Anyone who equates liberalism 2000 or even 200 years ago with modern liberalism is a moron.

[Rune]

hey dipshit, conservatives and republicans help the poor, you liberals don't own that, in fact i believe stats show the opposite...

you're full of shit if you think jesus would be a liberal, he would be against gay marriage...oh noes, now what stupidcan? see how stupid it is to try and make jesus belong to any one political group? no, you don't, you will do anything to give power to your failed political ideas, even using jesus....moron

you're a certified idiot to claim jesus would belong to any political idealogy

You know even less about Jesus than you do about politics. Isn't there a spandex forum you could post on?

[Rune]

Anyone who equates liberalism 2000 or even 200 years ago with modern liberalism is a moron.

True, but unfortunately conservatives are still the same.

[Rune]

hey dipshit, conservatives and republicans help the poor, you liberals don't own that, in fact i believe stats show the opposite...

you're full of shit if you think jesus would be a liberal, he would be against gay marriage...oh noes, now what stupidcan? see how stupid it is to try and make jesus belong to any one political group? no, you don't, you will do anything to give power to your failed political ideas, even using jesus....moron

you're a certified idiot to claim jesus would belong to any political idealogy

Show me in the bible where Jesus said he is against gay marriage you lying hypocrite.

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Show me in the bible where Jesus said he is against gay marriage you lying hypocrite.

show me where he abolished that law in the OT?

idiots like you would have us believe if jesus didn't talk about it, then he abolished it. jesus didn't talk about sex with goats either, using your logic, jesus supports goat/human sex

and tell me, what did i lie about and what is hypocritical about what i said? if you can't, i'll understand.

[DamnYankee]

True, but unfortunately conservatives are still the same.Thanks for proving that you're a moron.

[Beefy]

Anyone who equates liberalism 2000 or even 200 years ago with modern liberalism is a moron.

And anyone who thinks the Jews 2000 years ago were all blue eyed buff guys with blond hair and trimmed beards is an even bigger moron. Moron.

[WinterBorn]

Anyone who believes that the beliefs of any individual religion should have place in our laws is willing to pitch the US Constitution out the window.

[PostmodernProphet]

And anyone who thinks the Jews 2000 years ago were all blue eyed buff guys with blond hair and trimmed beards is an even bigger moron. Moron.

anyone who thinks that's a valid response to the argument also ranks high....

[Booyah!]

Maybe I don't understand John 9:39.

How does that relate to gay marriage and all this other stuff?

[DamnYankee]

And anyone who thinks the Jews 2000 years ago were all blue eyed buff guys with blond hair and trimmed beards is an even bigger moron. Moron. I agree, now show where I said that, moron.

[Rune]

Thanks for proving that you're a moron.

Another post where you call me a moron or some other pejorative term, yet offer no proof.

[Rune]

show me where he abolished that law in the OT?

idiots like you would have us believe if jesus didn't talk about it, then he abolished it. jesus didn't talk about sex with goats either, using your logic, jesus supports goat/human sex

and tell me, what did i lie about and what is hypocritical about what i said? if you can't, i'll understand.

If he didn't say something in his own words, you sure as fuck aren't qualified to say it for him.

How disturbingly arogant you are.

[Cancel 2018. 3]

If he didn't say something in his own words, you sure as fuck aren't qualified to say it for him.

How disturbingly arogant you are.

so once again you can't back up your claims...you can't show me where jesus changed god's written words saying homosexuality is an abomination. further, the NT does not just contain the words of jesus...jesus didn't talk about every single thing or every single law, like i said, your logic can only mean jesus approves of beastiality because he didn't outright condemn it. such logic is absurd and beyond arrogant. i'm not the one presuming to SPEAK for jesus, you are. you are stating that because jesus didn't expressly say X, that jesus in fact believes in X, despite the OT saying otherwise, because surely jesus walked the earth to repeat the entire OT.

:rolleyes:

romans 1:26-27

[Rune]

hey dipshit, conservatives and republicans help the poor, you liberals don't own that, in fact i believe stats show the opposite...

you're full of shit if you think jesus would be a liberal, he would be against gay marriage...oh noes, now what stupidcan? see how stupid it is to try and make jesus belong to any one political group? no, you don't, you will do anything to give power to your failed political ideas, even using jesus....moron

you're a certified idiot to claim jesus would belong to any political idealogy

Yurt! Hello, Yurt! Is this your post? Do you deny saying "he would be against gay marriage"? Hello, is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me.

Do you understand that you did indeed speak for Jesus?

Furthurmore, do you know the difference between the new and old testaments, idiot?

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Yurt! Hello, Yurt! Is this your post? Do you deny saying "he would be against gay marriage"? Hello, is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me.

Do you understand that you did indeed speak for Jesus?

Furthurmore, do you know the difference between the new and old testaments, idiot?

romans 1:26-27

thats because the NT denounces homosexuality and jesus NEVER said homosexuality was not an abomination. YOU are the one claiming to speak for jesus by saying simply because he DID NOT say something, then that must mean he is for it. jesus as spoke of making divorces harder and fornication more sinful by adding that just lusting after someone could be fornication, so he actually enhances the moral code for sexual ideas and you would have us believe that he would say homosexuality is ok.....makes no sense

like i said, your logic can only mean jesus supports beastiality. your logic is absurd. you can't even address your logic. you will now just keep repeating yourself ad nauseum with no citing support, never addressing the logical arguments because you must defend your world view at all costs.

[DamnYankee]

Another post where you call me a moron or some other pejorative term, yet offer no proof. The proof was your post that I responded to, duh.

[Rune]

The proof was your post that I responded to, duh.

Point out what I said that was wrong, duh.

[Rune]

Yurt, I am done talking to you. You clearly saidin your own words, what Jesus would do, and now you are trying to twist it arround. Go fuck yourself.

[DamnYankee]

Point out what I said that was wrong, duh.

You stated:


True, but unfortunately conservatives are still the same.

and was referring to this:


Anyone who equates liberalism 2000 or even 200 years ago with modern liberalism is a moron.

which means that you actually said: 'conservatives are still the same as they were 2000 or 200 years ago.'

But the fact is that modern conservatives in the US revere the Constitution and limited government, yet during the revolutionary period of the US someone who called themselves "conservative" would have been on the side of England.

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Yurt, I am done talking to you. You clearly saidin your own words, what Jesus would do, and now you are trying to twist it arround. Go fuck yourself.

didn't think you could actually debate the logic of your point....when faced with superior logic, run away dune

:)

[Cancel 2018. 3]

show me where he abolished that law in the OT?

idiots like you would have us believe if jesus didn't talk about it, then he abolished it. jesus didn't talk about sex with goats either, using your logic, jesus supports goat/human sex

and tell me, what did i lie about and what is hypocritical about what i said? if you can't, i'll understand.

for the record, dune of course did not state what i lied about or what i was a hypcrite about....as i predicted

[Rune]

You stated:



and was referring to this:



which means that you actually said: 'conservatives are still the same as they were 2000 or 200 years ago.'

But the fact is that modern conservatives in the US revere the Constitution and limited government, yet during the revolutionary period of the US someone who called themselves "conservative" would have been on the side of England.

No, that is just what you think. There is a difference between facts and your thoughts.

Modern "conservatives" claim to be fiscaly conservative, but they are not, at least not on a political basis. They claim to respect the constitution, yet want to amend it to fit their goals.

Modern conservatives are the same as those of two hundred years ago, in that they want to preserve the status quo, division of society into upper and lower classes, rule of aristocrocy, and beleive it or not, England. The Bank of England that is, the true ruler of the "free" world.

[DamnYankee]

No, that is just what you think. There is a difference between facts and your thoughts.

Modern "conservatives" claim to be fiscaly conservative, but they are not, at least not on a political basis. They claim to respect the constitution, yet want to amend it to fit their goals.

Modern conservatives are the same as those of two hundred years ago, in that they want to preserve the status quo, division of society into upper and lower classes, rule of aristocrocy, and beleive it or not, England. The Bank of England that is, the true ruler of the "free" world.

How ironic, you coming up with a definition of conservatism based not on reality, but what you think. Why not take a published platform of a national conservative group as a better indicator of what conservatives actually stand for? Wouldn't that be more logical and reasonable instead of making up your own?

[Rune]

How ironic, you coming up with a definition of conservatism based not on reality, but what you think. Why not take a published platform of a national conservative group as a better indicator of what conservatives actually stand for? Wouldn't that be more logical and reasonable instead of making up your own?

Sorry, I didn't make it up.

[DamnYankee]

Sorry, I didn't make it up.
Then you can cite the source. :)

[King Jesus]

He that is WITHOUT SIN among you, let him first cast a stone

[Mott the Hoople]

I prefer the Douay-Rheims to the King James.

You're Catholic. You're not entitled to an opinion. You have to trust a guy who wears a beanie and a dress. ;)

[Mott the Hoople]

Anyone who equates liberalism 2000 or even 200 years ago with modern liberalism is a moron.and anyone who equates todays conservatives with conservatives of even 20 years ago is an ever bigger moron!

[DamnYankee]

and anyone who equates todays conservatives with conservatives of even 20 years ago is an ever bigger moron!

Tell that to this guy:


True, but unfortunately conservatives are still the same.

[Topspin]

"If I could find a piece of tree, I'd build one good spliff"

[PostmodernProphet]

and anyone who equates todays conservatives with conservatives of even 20 years ago is an ever bigger moron!

I think you're both wrong....I think the conservatives of 2011 are quite similar to the conservatives of 1980.....as for liberals, they're the same idiots they were in the 60s.......I even think they're still smoking the same weed.....

[Topspin]

you'd benefit from smoking some weed you tight ass conservatard. The leading conservative jizz all over reagan's memory. How is that different you fucking clown.

[DamnYankee]

tophomophobe is ona roll today. mustbe smoking weed or his boss poked him up the ass, that gay fuck

[Minister of Truth]

One thing I'm reminded of about Jesus' ministry is that NONE of the Apostles were Saducees, which one could say were the liberals of His day. Instead, Jesus chose the company of mostly Pharisees (conservative) and one Zealot (ultra conservative).

[Topspin]

conservatives will use anything but Jesus's words to show he wasn't liberal.

He definatley smoked herb.
Show me a long haired carpenter who doesn't.

[PostmodernProphet]

you'd benefit from smoking some weed you tight ass conservatard. The leading conservative jizz all over reagan's memory. How is that different you fucking clown.

you see, all the weed smoking has made you delirious.....you actually think you know something about politics.....

[PostmodernProphet]

One thing I'm reminded of about Jesus' ministry is that NONE of the Apostles were Saducees, which one could say were the liberals of His day. Instead, Jesus chose the company of mostly Pharisees (conservative) and one Zealot (ultra conservative).

wow.....the Zealots were the ones who wanted to overthrow the government....hardly what I would call ultra conservative.....and the Pharisees and Sadducee were the ones plotting to kill him, so I'm not sure you could say he chose their company......if anything, he was always blamed for hanging with tax collectors......

[Minister of Truth]

wow.....the Zealots were the ones who wanted to overthrow the government....hardly what I would call ultra conservative.....and the Pharisees and Sadducee were the ones plotting to kill him, so I'm not sure you could say he chose their company......if anything, he was always blamed for hanging with tax collectors......

The Zealots wanted to overthrow the Roman government, not Jewish law.

[King Jesus]

Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Matthew 22:21

[PostmodernProphet]

The Zealots wanted to overthrow the Roman government, not Jewish law.

still, I think it's a bit awkward to say a Zealot is a conservative....just the way the word has transferred to the English language demonstrates a problem....I would think the Zealots would have more in common with the Peta activists who blow up mink farms....

[midcan5]

These debates always get into silly trivial nonsense, raised to importance because the trivial hides the substance of the debate. It is like Beck on TV, everything is out of context. Today's modern American conservative/libertarian are among the most un-Christian of groups. The UHC debate stands as a clear example. "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." John Kenneth Galbraith


'Why is Jesus a Liberal?'

"Webster's dictionary defines a Liberal as one who is open minded, not
strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional or established forms or
ways. Jesus was a pluralist Liberal who taught that one need not
conform to strict and orthodox views of God, religion, and life. He
rejected greed, violence, the glorification of power, the amassing of
wealth without social balance, and the personal judging of others, their
lifestyles and beliefs.

Over and over again, He taught us to believe in and live a spiritual and
ethical life based in our essential, inherent goodness. What Jesus
promoted was succinct set of spiritual principals and a way of life
based upon the of love, compassion, tolerance, and a strong belief in
the importance in giving and of generosity to those in need.

While not Biblical scholars, our common sense understanding of His
lessons as philosophically and politically Liberal is founded upon Jesus'
own words (see quotes below), modern interpretations of Liberation
Theology, and in the positive, loving and compassionate application of
His teachings - from the many early Saints to Mother Theresa and
Liberation Theology.

Certainly, Jesus brought a radically Liberal theology to the Orthodox
believers of his time. Jesus IS a Liberal even today because now more
than ever, His principals align with the very core of Liberal Beliefs."

http://www.jesusisaliberal.org/

[DamnYankee]

Midcan: would Jesus condone homosexual marriage like you liberals do?

[Rune]

Midcan: would Jesus condone homosexual marriage like you liberals do?

Why don't you believe in individual rights?

[DamnYankee]

Why don't you believe in individual rights?I do. I also believe in the truth.

[Minister of Truth]

I don't think Jesus would deny His Father's existence. Not a liberal on that account.
I don't think Jesus would get into drugs. Not a liberal on that account.
By today's standards, He would be denounced by liberals as a prude. Not a liberal on that account.
Jesus got along with His parents, and honored them. Not a liberal on that account.
Jesus would be pro-life. Not a liberal on that account.

The only thing Jesus would not have to fear from liberals is the death penalty/crucifixion. On the other hand, he might get labeled a dangerous cult leader and attacked by Janet Reno or Janet Napalitano. Basically, he should steer clear of anyone named Janet...

[PostmodernProphet]

On the other hand, he might get labeled a dangerous cult leader and attacked by Janet Reno or Janet Napalitano. Basically, he should steer clear of anyone named Janet...

"don't drink the water, there's no telling what he may have changed it into"....

[Rune]

I don't think Jesus would deny His Father's existence. Not a liberal on that account.
I don't think Jesus would get into drugs. Not a liberal on that account.
By today's standards, He would be denounced by liberals as a prude. Not a liberal on that account.
Jesus got along with His parents, and honored them. Not a liberal on that account.
Jesus would be pro-life. Not a liberal on that account.

The only thing Jesus would not have to fear from liberals is the death penalty/crucifixion. On the other hand, he might get labeled a dangerous cult leader and attacked by Janet Reno or Janet Napalitano. Basically, he should steer clear of anyone named Janet...

I don't deny the existence of God.
I am not into drugs.
I don't denounce prudes. My wife could be considered prudish.
I get along with my parents and honor them.
I am pro-life.

Your judgements of liberals are stereo-types at best.

[The Welsher]

What does the Bible say about welshing on a bet?

[PostmodernProphet]

I don't deny the existence of God.
I am not into drugs.
I don't denounce prudes. My wife could be considered prudish.
I get along with my parents and honor them.
I am pro-life.

Your judgements of liberals are stereo-types at best.

don't blame him, blame the liberals living the stereotype.....

[The Welsher]

Is welshing on a bet a sin?