The Gospel of Fwiffo
I am going to write this down. Every time you say anything about any of the following: The Iraqi War (or any war), any attacks, any case of murder, any case of wrongdoing happening to ANYONE, or any political move of any sort, this quote will come back to haunt you.
You may want to consider retracting that. ~Master Fwiffo
Huh. Maybe he should have kept that in mind when he was making HIS posts... Except, instead of just ONE quote, I'm going to document every instance of his stupidity (on the 'Spark, at least).
Posted here so you can all marvel at the stupidity that parades itself around as "compassionate, conservative Christianity".
Also, just so he can never say, "Well, I never said that!"
All quotes in alternating italics/bold italics are written by people other than Fwiffo. His quotes are in good ol'-fashioned plain text. I've also taken the liberty to mark who made the quotes, and who was quoting quotes, and quoting quoted quotes.... Yeah, I'll stop being confusing and let you read now.
Oh, btw... These quotes are from this thread
1. "Quote: PK = While the bible isn't the end all be all human guidebook, it is a great source of wisdom and a great source for teaching proper human behavior. If you think otherwise, then perhaps you should read it.
Quote: LF = Well, while I'm not too sure about Kuno, I have read the Bible, and I found little "moral" about it. Unless, of course, you consider the (God-sponsored!)murder, rape, and pillaging of neighboring tribes to be "moral".
Fwiffo: And your credibility goes from beievable to Not. Please show me where we have some God-sponsered raping and pillaging please. Umm, yeah not there. Pillaging, yes, I do seem to remember many times where God specifically said do NOT take the goods... And whenever Israel disobeyed, they got punished.....
Murder? Define murder. It could be veiwed as punishment, or casulties of war, ect. But rape and pillaging? Come on!
Quote: LF = Also, I fail to see what is so "immoral" about boiling a goat kid in its mother's milk. But, hey, it's one of the commandments, right up there alongside "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt not commit adultery", so it must be important. Right?
Fwiffo: Go look up commandments again. You quoted one of the laws, and said it was one of the commandments. Right. And would you want to boil a goat kid in its mothers milk? That just sounds disgusting...."
2. "Quote: Fwiffo = Go look up commandments again. You quoted one of the laws, and said it was one of the commandments. Right. And would you want to boil a goat kid in its mothers milk? That just sounds disgusting....
Quote: Mphage = Exodus 34, the second set of commandments, the replacement set for the ones MOses broke, the ones the covnent was actually FORMED on. She quoted number 10.
You have read the Bible, right?
Fwiffo: After review, I find that you are right- in a sense. Relevent passage is here:http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?search...34;&version=31;
These do not rank with the ten commandments. Rather, they are part of the law, and while they are commandments, they are not at all ranked with the Ten, which is what she implied.
Though, it is kind of odd to see the Young goat in the mothers milk along with the others there. It was probably a cultural thing referencing other nearby civilizations at the time.
-edit- Oh, and your DEAD WRONG about the replacement set. These extra commandments were given *after* the Lord recarved the Ten Commandments onto the new stones."
3. "Quote: Fwiffo = And your credibility goes from beievable to Not. Please show me where we have some God-sponsered raping and pillaging please. Umm, yeah not there. Pillaging, yes, I do seem to remember many times where God specifically said do NOT take the goods... And whenever Israel disobeyed, they got punished.....Murder? Define murder. It could be veiwed as punishment, or casulties of war, ect. But rape and pillaging? Come on!
Quote: RDS = you just proved the great Flaw of the bible. Its all subject to your personal Beliefs.
Fwiffo: It is, but that would rather seem to me as a great flaw of humanity, seeing as just about anything could be interpreted any thousands of ways. Add to the fact that we're working from translations (of which not everything is perfectly accurate), and that adds to the confusion.
I don't think that counts as a 'flaw of the bible' though."
4. "Quote: Fwiffo = -edit- Oh, and your DEAD WRONG about the replacement set. These extra commandments were given *after* the Lord recarved the Ten Commandments onto the new stones.
Quote: Mphage= Scripture to back that up please.
Fwiffo: Though I only quoted one, this link holds the best answer to the question of the two ten-commandments:
http://www.tektonics.org/qt/tentab.html"
5. "Quote: LF = Murder is the deliberate taking of another human life, out of malice. That's pretty simple.
Deut. 20:13: "13 And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword"
Deut. 20:17: "17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee"
Sounds and awful lot like murder to me. Notice it makes no distinction between soldiers and civilians - it's a "Kill them all!" sort of deal.
Fwiffo: Several things: A) God is the ultimate Judge. If people have done enough evil, then God can punish them as he chooses.
B) On Every male, generally in old testment times, 'every male' meant 'every male of fighting age'.
C) All those yada-ites listed were, acording to biblical texts, extremely immoral. Maybe, just maybe, they deserved it?
Quote: LF = Now, you want rape and pillaging? Have a gander:
Pillaging:
also includes murder here) Num. 21:35: "35 So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land."
Num. 31:9-11: " 9 And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods. 10 And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire. 11 And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts."
Deut. 20:14: "14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee."
Fwiffo: Hrm, I guess this one I'll back down on. I could invoke the 'spoils of war' idea, but why bother?
Quote: LF = Rape: Deut. 20:10-14: "10 When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, 11 And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; 12 Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; 13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. 14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her."
Tell me, tell me, that that is not rape, I dare you.
Fwiffo: Give me the *right* verse, and I'll get back to you, because Deuteronomy 20:10-14 tells them to ask for peace from the city first. Heck, you even quoted Deut 14 above."
6. "Quote: Mphage = Heh. That's an assertion of what MAY be, and does not address my request for a scripture to back it up. It's an excuse in otherwords, apologetics. I'm not asking for what someone thinks "Might be the case", which relies on their interpretation of what the scripture is actually saying, I'm asking for you to back up your statement with actual scripture.
Fwiffo: I can back it up with the first verse of that chapter, where God specifically says he'll write what was on the tablets before Moses broke them.
But the bible is ultimatly open to endless interpretation regardless.
Quote: Mphage = It's said that God wrote the Bible, but man actually penned it. Same thing is completely likely for what is meant in verse 1, verse 28 doesn't specify who did the writing, it is simply said "he" - note that it's a lesser form of this word, lowercased and subservient.
Fwiffo: Isn't that your own brand of interpretation, which you just railed against? Maybe God told moses to put these on the same stone tablets, maybe Moses hammered out the original 10 and spoke these by word, or maybe... ect. ect. ect.
And isn't it a kindof trivial point overall?"
7. "Quote: Fwiffo = Several things: A) God is the ultimate Judge. If people have done enough evil, then God can punish them as he chooses.
B) On Every male, generally in old testment times, 'every male' meant 'every male of fighting age'.
C) All those yada-ites listed were, acording to biblical texts, extremely immoral. Maybe, just maybe, they deserved it?
Quote: Mphage = Mmmm, trying to justify murder... mmmmmmmmm.
Fwiffo: Question: Is putting a (for example) baby-murdering scumball to death under our legal code murder? If you think it is, then yes. If you think its not, then no.
Quote: Fwiffo = Give me the *right* verse, and I'll get back to you, because Deuteronomy 20:10-14 tells them to ask for peace from the city first. Heck, you even quoted Deut 14 above.
Quote: Mphage = Deutoronomy 21:10-14, she was 1 chapter off, and had been quoting heavily from chapter 20. Sheesh, give her a break.
Fwiffo: Well *i* didn't know. Looking at that passage, I think a lot of the problem here is shes using old king James, which A) isnt very accurate, and B) is hard to read. Heres the passage in NIV.
When you go out to war against your enemies, and the LORD your God delivers them into your hand, and you take them captive, and you see among the captives a beutiful women, and desire her, and would take her for your wife, you shall bring her home to your house. She shall pull off the clothes of her captivity (Fwiff note: Metophorical in a sense, IE not be a captive anymore), and she shall shave her head and trim her nails (Fwiff note: If I understand correctly, a sign of being accepted into the Jewish culture), and mourn her father and mother a full month (Fwiffo note: Again, IIUC, during this period you can't do anything to her in any sense), after that, you may go to her and she shall be your wife. And it shall be, if you have no delight in her, then you shall set her free, but you certanly shall not sell her for money, you shall not treat her brutally, because you have humbled her.
Fwiffo: Not nearly as bad, is it? Certanly not rape."
8. "Quote: Fwiffo = Question: Is putting a (for example) baby-murdering scumball to death under our legal code murder? If you think it is, then yes. If you think its not, then no.
Quote: VP = What are their 'crimes'? Murder is murder.
Fwiffo: If they were one of the Yada-Ites, the more likly then not, they were involved in children-sacrifices, general whoring of everybody, ect. I doubt God would have killed them without a good reason. But, hey, your all cynics, so I guess your right.
Quote: Fwiffo = Not nearly as bad, is it? Certanly not rape.
Quote: VP = Again with the assertations of 'well this ACTUALLY means...' Stop trying to change the Bible to fit what makes it seem fluffier to you.
This post also brought to you by MPhage, Inc. and the letter 3.
Fwiffo: No, its reading a better translated version, and adding what I know about Jewish culture into the mix. Remember, these books were written thousands of years ago, for completly diffrent cultures. These meanings would have been *very* diffrent. We look at these and go OMG bad, but no real study of the bible can be complete without a wealth of knowledge of the times.
Disclaimer: No, I do not pretend to be an expert on the times. This stuff I only know because my pastor is very thorough on researching all this kind of stuff before he teaches it."
Note the "Fundie" logic, the twisting of the facts, the denial of Scripture because it wasn't from a "perfect" translation, etc, etc, etc...
Don't you just love these sort of idiots?
EDIT: And we have more Fwiffo quotes! Yay! This post is going to grow to be gargantuan... Maybe I should make a second one soon XD
These posts are from this thread.
9. "Fwiffo: Yes, because people organizing to act politically on their beleifs is SUCH a bad thing.
How is this any diffrent from a Pro-Choice, Pro-Gay, Pro-Business, or Pro-Anything Orginization is beyond me.
OH NOES! THEIR CHRISTIANS! THEY WANT A THEOCRACY WHERE IF THEYY DONT WORSHIP GOD, THEY DIE! OMGWTFBBQ!!!!!!1111111
And on another note, that article *certanly* wasn't biased against Christianity in any way. Uh-uh."
10. "Quote: Fwiffo = How is this any diffrent from a Pro-Choice, Pro-Gay, Pro-Business, or Pro-Anything Orginization is beyond me.
Quote: TCM = It's different because they're attempting to force their ancient mythological insanity on the rest of the country, and that is *extremely* dangerous.
Fwiffo: Arn't you trying to force your godless, baby-killing agenda on us? How is that any diffrent from our 'ancient mythological insannity'? (which if you told me that in person, I would have socked you in the face)
Even if these guys got to power (which they arn't any more then MoveOn.Org or the extreme wing of NOW is, and I noticed nobody here is bitching about them), they arn't going to make a theocracy, outlaw other religions or athiesm or anything else.
This is just an excuse to bash Christianity again, which I notice is happening more and more on this board. I assume then I can start digging up stories of say, the MBLA, and make blanket statements about you?"
11. "Quote: Fwiffo = Arn't you trying to force your godless, baby-killing agenda on us? How is that any diffrent from our 'ancient mythological insannity'? (which if you told me that in person, I would have socked you in the face)
Quote: TCM = Wow. Thanks for proving my point.
Fwiffo: Apparently, you missed it. Now excuse me, I need to go dig up some extremes from your side and start throwing blankets."
12. "Quote: Fwiffo = Apparently, you missed it. Now excuse me, I need to go dig up some extremes from your side and start throwing blankets.
Quote: TCM = Let's see, you're a believe in ancient myths, accuse people who understand scientific fact to be "baby killers" and then threaten to "sock me" if I had pointed these things out to you in person.
Fwiffo: If I said what I wanted to say, I would get banned for flaming. Let me just say I strongly object to you labeling my beleifs ancient myths, as much as you do getting called a baby-killer. GET IT? And your STILL missing the point, which is pulling out the extremes of the faction and making blanket statements is a BAD thing.
Quote: TCM = Sadly, I don't think you're alone in your convictions, and that terrifies me to no end. People like you need to be stopped before they DO gain actual power. I'm not the bad guy here. YOU are.
Fwiffo: 'Oh look at me, Im so innocent EVIL RELIGION EVIL RELIGION!' Please.
Now I better step out of this before I start flaming. Its obvious this is just a Christian bashing party based on the words of a few nutcases. Go on and have your fun."
13. "Quote: TB = Fwiffo, they're ancient myths, just because you believe them to be true doesn't mean they aren't. Your well within your rights to believe them to be true, and maybe they are, if archaeologists ever find any evidence to at least support their validity then I'll happily accept them myself
Fwiffo: Since you asked so nicely, while we;re not going to find evidence that Moses actually talked to a burning Bush, a surprising amount of archelogical evidence supports at very least, every city, every ethnic group, and every fall of a society (though methods may be in question) has actually happened.
Of course, the following links are far from unbiased, but its a start.
http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/bibarch.htm
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/archeology.html
http://www.souldevice.org/christian_archeology.html
http://www.gospelcom.net/faithfacts/maps_a.html "
And, from this thread:
14. "Quote: kizudarake = Also, try to get a definitive answer as to which version of the bible is the True Bible. KJV? NIV? Catholic? JW? Mormon? Is the old testament the only valid part, as the Judaism says? Is the Qoran valid?
Fwiffo: The Christian Bible is the Old and New Testements. KJV and NIV are diffrent translations of the same books- the 'True' bible is the original hebrew and greek. Unless your being nitpicky, there is no diffrence other then readability between NIV and KJV. Note: He COMPLETELY disregards what he has said about the KJV Bible before (that it was a "bad translation", "Flawed", and "inaccurate")
I dont know if or how the Catholic bible is diffrent then the other two.
JW and Mormons are spinoff cults.
Judaism and Islam are diffrent religions entirely.
According to the average Protestant Christian, the DEFINITIVE bible is any accurate translation of the Old and New testements. Is that the answer you want?"
15. "Quote: kizudarake = But how do we know that the protestant christians have it right?
Fwiffo: Thats a matter of faith. You have to determine that for yourself.
Quote: kizudarake = And if they're right, how do we know which translation is accurate?
Fwiffo: On the whole, all the major translations are fairly accurate Note: He's AGAIN contradicting himself!, NIV and NKJV being the ones most people use. If you want to get down and gritty, find a bible that cross-references with the greek and hebrew.
You see to be under the impression that there are major differences between the versions. There isn't. Most of it is just word arangment and eye candy. One may read ''You shall not kill others' the other may read 'Thou shalt not murder.' While there is a slight difference, its hardly something of criticall importance."
16. "Quote: kizudarake = Even a slight wording change can mean a major difference in meaning. Go translate a sentence in Babelfish to spanish, and then translate it back to english, for an example.
Fwiffo: Your right, but there are no major doctrinal diffrences in the versions, and besides, all these translations were carefully done, not half-hazzard jobs. The best bible you can get is one that cross-references the greek and hebrew." Note: Need I point out his contradictions even further? This is really starting to get old, Fwiff.
17. "Quote: Mike M = On the contrary, the difference between "Thou shalt not kill" and "though shalt not murder" is pretty big.
Fwiffo: I think Ive had this conversation before somewhere...
But in general, if your just reading the bible through for the first time, its not that big of a diffrence. Kill others, murder you still get the idea that killing=bad.
If your going into deep, die-hard studying however thats where differences can arrise. But the overrall message of the book remains the same."
Aaaand, there we have it. There will be a second thread opening for this eventually. When I have more quotes to post :) Ciao!
You may want to consider retracting that. ~Master Fwiffo
Huh. Maybe he should have kept that in mind when he was making HIS posts... Except, instead of just ONE quote, I'm going to document every instance of his stupidity (on the 'Spark, at least).
Posted here so you can all marvel at the stupidity that parades itself around as "compassionate, conservative Christianity".
Also, just so he can never say, "Well, I never said that!"
All quotes in alternating italics/bold italics are written by people other than Fwiffo. His quotes are in good ol'-fashioned plain text. I've also taken the liberty to mark who made the quotes, and who was quoting quotes, and quoting quoted quotes.... Yeah, I'll stop being confusing and let you read now.
Oh, btw... These quotes are from this thread
1. "Quote: PK = While the bible isn't the end all be all human guidebook, it is a great source of wisdom and a great source for teaching proper human behavior. If you think otherwise, then perhaps you should read it.
Quote: LF = Well, while I'm not too sure about Kuno, I have read the Bible, and I found little "moral" about it. Unless, of course, you consider the (God-sponsored!)murder, rape, and pillaging of neighboring tribes to be "moral".
Fwiffo: And your credibility goes from beievable to Not. Please show me where we have some God-sponsered raping and pillaging please. Umm, yeah not there. Pillaging, yes, I do seem to remember many times where God specifically said do NOT take the goods... And whenever Israel disobeyed, they got punished.....
Murder? Define murder. It could be veiwed as punishment, or casulties of war, ect. But rape and pillaging? Come on!
Quote: LF = Also, I fail to see what is so "immoral" about boiling a goat kid in its mother's milk. But, hey, it's one of the commandments, right up there alongside "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt not commit adultery", so it must be important. Right?
Fwiffo: Go look up commandments again. You quoted one of the laws, and said it was one of the commandments. Right. And would you want to boil a goat kid in its mothers milk? That just sounds disgusting...."
2. "Quote: Fwiffo = Go look up commandments again. You quoted one of the laws, and said it was one of the commandments. Right. And would you want to boil a goat kid in its mothers milk? That just sounds disgusting....
Quote: Mphage = Exodus 34, the second set of commandments, the replacement set for the ones MOses broke, the ones the covnent was actually FORMED on. She quoted number 10.
You have read the Bible, right?
Fwiffo: After review, I find that you are right- in a sense. Relevent passage is here:http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?search...34;&version=31;
These do not rank with the ten commandments. Rather, they are part of the law, and while they are commandments, they are not at all ranked with the Ten, which is what she implied.
Though, it is kind of odd to see the Young goat in the mothers milk along with the others there. It was probably a cultural thing referencing other nearby civilizations at the time.
-edit- Oh, and your DEAD WRONG about the replacement set. These extra commandments were given *after* the Lord recarved the Ten Commandments onto the new stones."
3. "Quote: Fwiffo = And your credibility goes from beievable to Not. Please show me where we have some God-sponsered raping and pillaging please. Umm, yeah not there. Pillaging, yes, I do seem to remember many times where God specifically said do NOT take the goods... And whenever Israel disobeyed, they got punished.....Murder? Define murder. It could be veiwed as punishment, or casulties of war, ect. But rape and pillaging? Come on!
Quote: RDS = you just proved the great Flaw of the bible. Its all subject to your personal Beliefs.
Fwiffo: It is, but that would rather seem to me as a great flaw of humanity, seeing as just about anything could be interpreted any thousands of ways. Add to the fact that we're working from translations (of which not everything is perfectly accurate), and that adds to the confusion.
I don't think that counts as a 'flaw of the bible' though."
4. "Quote: Fwiffo = -edit- Oh, and your DEAD WRONG about the replacement set. These extra commandments were given *after* the Lord recarved the Ten Commandments onto the new stones.
Quote: Mphage= Scripture to back that up please.
Fwiffo: Though I only quoted one, this link holds the best answer to the question of the two ten-commandments:
http://www.tektonics.org/qt/tentab.html"
5. "Quote: LF = Murder is the deliberate taking of another human life, out of malice. That's pretty simple.
Deut. 20:13: "13 And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword"
Deut. 20:17: "17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee"
Sounds and awful lot like murder to me. Notice it makes no distinction between soldiers and civilians - it's a "Kill them all!" sort of deal.
Fwiffo: Several things: A) God is the ultimate Judge. If people have done enough evil, then God can punish them as he chooses.
B) On Every male, generally in old testment times, 'every male' meant 'every male of fighting age'.
C) All those yada-ites listed were, acording to biblical texts, extremely immoral. Maybe, just maybe, they deserved it?
Quote: LF = Now, you want rape and pillaging? Have a gander:
Pillaging:
also includes murder here) Num. 21:35: "35 So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land."
Num. 31:9-11: " 9 And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods. 10 And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire. 11 And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts."
Deut. 20:14: "14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee."
Fwiffo: Hrm, I guess this one I'll back down on. I could invoke the 'spoils of war' idea, but why bother?
Quote: LF = Rape: Deut. 20:10-14: "10 When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, 11 And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; 12 Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; 13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. 14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her."
Tell me, tell me, that that is not rape, I dare you.
Fwiffo: Give me the *right* verse, and I'll get back to you, because Deuteronomy 20:10-14 tells them to ask for peace from the city first. Heck, you even quoted Deut 14 above."
6. "Quote: Mphage = Heh. That's an assertion of what MAY be, and does not address my request for a scripture to back it up. It's an excuse in otherwords, apologetics. I'm not asking for what someone thinks "Might be the case", which relies on their interpretation of what the scripture is actually saying, I'm asking for you to back up your statement with actual scripture.
Fwiffo: I can back it up with the first verse of that chapter, where God specifically says he'll write what was on the tablets before Moses broke them.
But the bible is ultimatly open to endless interpretation regardless.
Quote: Mphage = It's said that God wrote the Bible, but man actually penned it. Same thing is completely likely for what is meant in verse 1, verse 28 doesn't specify who did the writing, it is simply said "he" - note that it's a lesser form of this word, lowercased and subservient.
Fwiffo: Isn't that your own brand of interpretation, which you just railed against? Maybe God told moses to put these on the same stone tablets, maybe Moses hammered out the original 10 and spoke these by word, or maybe... ect. ect. ect.
And isn't it a kindof trivial point overall?"
7. "Quote: Fwiffo = Several things: A) God is the ultimate Judge. If people have done enough evil, then God can punish them as he chooses.
B) On Every male, generally in old testment times, 'every male' meant 'every male of fighting age'.
C) All those yada-ites listed were, acording to biblical texts, extremely immoral. Maybe, just maybe, they deserved it?
Quote: Mphage = Mmmm, trying to justify murder... mmmmmmmmm.
Fwiffo: Question: Is putting a (for example) baby-murdering scumball to death under our legal code murder? If you think it is, then yes. If you think its not, then no.
Quote: Fwiffo = Give me the *right* verse, and I'll get back to you, because Deuteronomy 20:10-14 tells them to ask for peace from the city first. Heck, you even quoted Deut 14 above.
Quote: Mphage = Deutoronomy 21:10-14, she was 1 chapter off, and had been quoting heavily from chapter 20. Sheesh, give her a break.
Fwiffo: Well *i* didn't know. Looking at that passage, I think a lot of the problem here is shes using old king James, which A) isnt very accurate, and B) is hard to read. Heres the passage in NIV.
When you go out to war against your enemies, and the LORD your God delivers them into your hand, and you take them captive, and you see among the captives a beutiful women, and desire her, and would take her for your wife, you shall bring her home to your house. She shall pull off the clothes of her captivity (Fwiff note: Metophorical in a sense, IE not be a captive anymore), and she shall shave her head and trim her nails (Fwiff note: If I understand correctly, a sign of being accepted into the Jewish culture), and mourn her father and mother a full month (Fwiffo note: Again, IIUC, during this period you can't do anything to her in any sense), after that, you may go to her and she shall be your wife. And it shall be, if you have no delight in her, then you shall set her free, but you certanly shall not sell her for money, you shall not treat her brutally, because you have humbled her.
Fwiffo: Not nearly as bad, is it? Certanly not rape."
8. "Quote: Fwiffo = Question: Is putting a (for example) baby-murdering scumball to death under our legal code murder? If you think it is, then yes. If you think its not, then no.
Quote: VP = What are their 'crimes'? Murder is murder.
Fwiffo: If they were one of the Yada-Ites, the more likly then not, they were involved in children-sacrifices, general whoring of everybody, ect. I doubt God would have killed them without a good reason. But, hey, your all cynics, so I guess your right.
Quote: Fwiffo = Not nearly as bad, is it? Certanly not rape.
Quote: VP = Again with the assertations of 'well this ACTUALLY means...' Stop trying to change the Bible to fit what makes it seem fluffier to you.
This post also brought to you by MPhage, Inc. and the letter 3.
Fwiffo: No, its reading a better translated version, and adding what I know about Jewish culture into the mix. Remember, these books were written thousands of years ago, for completly diffrent cultures. These meanings would have been *very* diffrent. We look at these and go OMG bad, but no real study of the bible can be complete without a wealth of knowledge of the times.
Disclaimer: No, I do not pretend to be an expert on the times. This stuff I only know because my pastor is very thorough on researching all this kind of stuff before he teaches it."
Note the "Fundie" logic, the twisting of the facts, the denial of Scripture because it wasn't from a "perfect" translation, etc, etc, etc...
Don't you just love these sort of idiots?
EDIT: And we have more Fwiffo quotes! Yay! This post is going to grow to be gargantuan... Maybe I should make a second one soon XD
These posts are from this thread.
9. "Fwiffo: Yes, because people organizing to act politically on their beleifs is SUCH a bad thing.
How is this any diffrent from a Pro-Choice, Pro-Gay, Pro-Business, or Pro-Anything Orginization is beyond me.
OH NOES! THEIR CHRISTIANS! THEY WANT A THEOCRACY WHERE IF THEYY DONT WORSHIP GOD, THEY DIE! OMGWTFBBQ!!!!!!1111111
And on another note, that article *certanly* wasn't biased against Christianity in any way. Uh-uh."
10. "Quote: Fwiffo = How is this any diffrent from a Pro-Choice, Pro-Gay, Pro-Business, or Pro-Anything Orginization is beyond me.
Quote: TCM = It's different because they're attempting to force their ancient mythological insanity on the rest of the country, and that is *extremely* dangerous.
Fwiffo: Arn't you trying to force your godless, baby-killing agenda on us? How is that any diffrent from our 'ancient mythological insannity'? (which if you told me that in person, I would have socked you in the face)
Even if these guys got to power (which they arn't any more then MoveOn.Org or the extreme wing of NOW is, and I noticed nobody here is bitching about them), they arn't going to make a theocracy, outlaw other religions or athiesm or anything else.
This is just an excuse to bash Christianity again, which I notice is happening more and more on this board. I assume then I can start digging up stories of say, the MBLA, and make blanket statements about you?"
11. "Quote: Fwiffo = Arn't you trying to force your godless, baby-killing agenda on us? How is that any diffrent from our 'ancient mythological insannity'? (which if you told me that in person, I would have socked you in the face)
Quote: TCM = Wow. Thanks for proving my point.
Fwiffo: Apparently, you missed it. Now excuse me, I need to go dig up some extremes from your side and start throwing blankets."
12. "Quote: Fwiffo = Apparently, you missed it. Now excuse me, I need to go dig up some extremes from your side and start throwing blankets.
Quote: TCM = Let's see, you're a believe in ancient myths, accuse people who understand scientific fact to be "baby killers" and then threaten to "sock me" if I had pointed these things out to you in person.
Fwiffo: If I said what I wanted to say, I would get banned for flaming. Let me just say I strongly object to you labeling my beleifs ancient myths, as much as you do getting called a baby-killer. GET IT? And your STILL missing the point, which is pulling out the extremes of the faction and making blanket statements is a BAD thing.
Quote: TCM = Sadly, I don't think you're alone in your convictions, and that terrifies me to no end. People like you need to be stopped before they DO gain actual power. I'm not the bad guy here. YOU are.
Fwiffo: 'Oh look at me, Im so innocent EVIL RELIGION EVIL RELIGION!' Please.
Now I better step out of this before I start flaming. Its obvious this is just a Christian bashing party based on the words of a few nutcases. Go on and have your fun."
13. "Quote: TB = Fwiffo, they're ancient myths, just because you believe them to be true doesn't mean they aren't. Your well within your rights to believe them to be true, and maybe they are, if archaeologists ever find any evidence to at least support their validity then I'll happily accept them myself
Fwiffo: Since you asked so nicely, while we;re not going to find evidence that Moses actually talked to a burning Bush, a surprising amount of archelogical evidence supports at very least, every city, every ethnic group, and every fall of a society (though methods may be in question) has actually happened.
Of course, the following links are far from unbiased, but its a start.
http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/bibarch.htm
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/archeology.html
http://www.souldevice.org/christian_archeology.html
http://www.gospelcom.net/faithfacts/maps_a.html "
And, from this thread:
14. "Quote: kizudarake = Also, try to get a definitive answer as to which version of the bible is the True Bible. KJV? NIV? Catholic? JW? Mormon? Is the old testament the only valid part, as the Judaism says? Is the Qoran valid?
Fwiffo: The Christian Bible is the Old and New Testements. KJV and NIV are diffrent translations of the same books- the 'True' bible is the original hebrew and greek. Unless your being nitpicky, there is no diffrence other then readability between NIV and KJV. Note: He COMPLETELY disregards what he has said about the KJV Bible before (that it was a "bad translation", "Flawed", and "inaccurate")
I dont know if or how the Catholic bible is diffrent then the other two.
JW and Mormons are spinoff cults.
Judaism and Islam are diffrent religions entirely.
According to the average Protestant Christian, the DEFINITIVE bible is any accurate translation of the Old and New testements. Is that the answer you want?"
15. "Quote: kizudarake = But how do we know that the protestant christians have it right?
Fwiffo: Thats a matter of faith. You have to determine that for yourself.
Quote: kizudarake = And if they're right, how do we know which translation is accurate?
Fwiffo: On the whole, all the major translations are fairly accurate Note: He's AGAIN contradicting himself!, NIV and NKJV being the ones most people use. If you want to get down and gritty, find a bible that cross-references with the greek and hebrew.
You see to be under the impression that there are major differences between the versions. There isn't. Most of it is just word arangment and eye candy. One may read ''You shall not kill others' the other may read 'Thou shalt not murder.' While there is a slight difference, its hardly something of criticall importance."
16. "Quote: kizudarake = Even a slight wording change can mean a major difference in meaning. Go translate a sentence in Babelfish to spanish, and then translate it back to english, for an example.
Fwiffo: Your right, but there are no major doctrinal diffrences in the versions, and besides, all these translations were carefully done, not half-hazzard jobs. The best bible you can get is one that cross-references the greek and hebrew." Note: Need I point out his contradictions even further? This is really starting to get old, Fwiff.
17. "Quote: Mike M = On the contrary, the difference between "Thou shalt not kill" and "though shalt not murder" is pretty big.
Fwiffo: I think Ive had this conversation before somewhere...
But in general, if your just reading the bible through for the first time, its not that big of a diffrence. Kill others, murder you still get the idea that killing=bad.
If your going into deep, die-hard studying however thats where differences can arrise. But the overrall message of the book remains the same."
Aaaand, there we have it. There will be a second thread opening for this eventually. When I have more quotes to post :) Ciao!
posted by Grace | 12:59 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home