Freedom of Speech

13,194 Views | 326 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by diehard03
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Orko said:

ramblin_ag02 said:

Quote:

So simple. Don't abandon your spouse and children, you don't get castrated, branded, jailed, etc. As preached by Paul the Apostle.

You're welcome.
Nvm. You had me there for a minute. I actually thought you were serious
Completely serious. There you have Paul saying that authorities acting as God's servants bear the sword for a reason. Don't be an ******* and you have nothing to fear.

Don't like it, take it up with Paul.
I hear you. Totally serious. I'm highly offended and appalled



No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Neon R
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Get BTFO? Can't argue any further? Post a GIF!
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Neon R said:

Get BTFO? Can't argue any further? Post a GIF!
We're arguing and I can't handle it I'm so mad right now. This is so serious!
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Neon R
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ramblin_ag02 said:

Neon R said:

Get BTFO? Can't argue any further? Post a GIF!
We're arguing and I can't handle it I'm so mad right now. This is so serious!

Post more GIFs!
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Here you go

No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
tehmackdaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Orko said:

So, the exact opposite of what you said that I said. Its cool, though. Sometimes my kids get so excited in an argument that they forget to actually understand what the other person is communicating.

I mistakenly typed "civil" instead of "church". My apologies for the confusion.

My point still remains.

So let's try it again.

You appealed to the authority of the early Church elders to make your point for a theocracy today.

Then you (correctly) admitted that the early Church elders neither acted nor called for anything like the action you are calling for today.

Summary: You are appealing to the authority of the early Church elders who you admit we have no evidence of them supporting your position.
Orko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tehmackdaddy said:

Orko said:

So, the exact opposite of what you said that I said. Its cool, though. Sometimes my kids get so excited in an argument that they forget to actually understand what the other person is communicating.

I mistakenly typed "civil" instead of "church". My apologies for the confusion.

My point still remains.

So let's try it again.

You appealed to the authority of the early Church elders to make your point for a theocracy today.

Then you (correctly) admitted that the early Church elders neither acted nor called for anything like the action you are calling for today.

Summary: You are appealing to the authority of the early Church elders who you admit we have no evidence of them supporting your position.
What are you rambling about?

I'm calling for the state to exercise Civil Authority (i.e. the Sword) for immorality, as Paul talks about in Romans 13. This could range from homosexuality to murder. All immoral and all punished throughout history by civil authorities everywhere. The Sword could range from public humiliation to execution. I feel like I have to say that last part in case Pacifist gets all in a tizzy about "the Sword" and tries to explain that it really means a slightly effeminate man tapping you on the head with a foam sword and saying, "You silly billy gumdrops, don't do that again."

In various other threads, I have repeatedly called for the Church Authorities to purge the unrepentant sinners from among them, as Paul talks about in 1 Corinthians 5.

There is no inconsistency in what I am saying here. In fact, you are looking at the model of Civil/Church division of authority since the early days of Christianity.

Finally, are you are really going to try and argue the the early Church elders were not given authority like that of an authoritarian theocracy. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 5, is literally telling the elder(s) to exile the unrepentant sinners from the church. He is accusing them of being lax in exercising their authority. It is a textbook example of a theocratic leader exercising their authority.
Remember, patriot, what they took from you. Your nation's identity, its religion, and its people are no more. Remember how we got here.
tehmackdaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Orko said:


What are you rambling about?
You seemed to be appealing to the authority of the Church elders to justify your viewpoint that a theocratic state should castrate men who abandon their wives and children. That appeal to authority is not justifiable.

If that is not what you mean, then never mind. That is how it comes across.
Neon R
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tehmackdaddy said:

Orko said:


What are you rambling about?
You seemed to be appealing to the authority of the Church elders to justify your viewpoint that a theocratic state should castrate men who abandon their wives and children. That appeal to authority is not justifiable.

If that is not what you mean, then never mind. That is how it comes across.

Ahaha I think I get it now. Everyone seems to be getting hung up on the castration suggestion.
Seamaster
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I just want to go on record and say that I haven't read the past 4 pages and am not responsible for the contents and views expressed therein, neither is my failure to repudiate anything an endorsement of anything they've said.

- Seamaster
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

I just want to go on record and say that I haven't read the past 4 pages and am not responsible for the contents and views expressed therein, neither is my failure to repudiate anything an endorsement of anything they've said.

- Seamaster

4D chess from Seamaster.

Create socks to build following for your causes. Check.
Post ****storms fairly often to set expectations. Check.
Go against your socks to surprise Pacifist and Beer Baron. Check.
Next step here.
Somewhere, he profits. This is where the 4D chess comes in.
Orko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tehmackdaddy said:

Orko said:


What are you rambling about?
You seemed to be appealing to the authority of the Church elders to justify your viewpoint that a theocratic state should castrate men who abandon their wives and children. That appeal to authority is not justifiable.

If that is not what you mean, then never mind. That is how it comes across.
Here is what I wrote about the Church Elders.
Quote:

For real? This is a revelation to me. Of course I know that. I was facetiously pointing out that the much-maligned autocratic theocracy is the government of choice by Christ. It is also the way that the initial churches were ran. Authority rested in the elder(s), who answered to the apostles. Paul admonishes the elder(s) of the Church in Corinth for failing to execute their duty in removing the unrepentant degenerates that were among them, but I digress.
I'm specifically pointing out that their autocratic authority gave them the power to exile unrepentant sinners and how they are being criticized for not doing so. Its merely another example of how God seems to prefer autocratic authority to democracy.

I'm not sure how you brought castration into it, since my justification for that was Romans 13. It could be that you confused my use of 1 Corinthians 5 and Romans 13 because they have the same author, the Apostle Paul. It doesn't appear to have come off the way you are taking it to anybody else, so it seems you are confused.

Anyway, if you want to discuss it more, I'm happy to do so. Paul's epistles are very rich in detail on how the churches should be run, who is Israel, and what role civil authority plays in the world.

For instance, Pacifist would likely take pride in how many unrepentant degenerates he can get to in his church. In doing so he is opening himself up to admonishment from Paul, as did the Corinthians. The context of what I am speaking of is 1 Corinthians 5, but specifically I am referring to verse 6.

Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?

The commentaries are in agreement. He is specifically referring to a thing they have been boasting about. Given the preceding and following text, the church in Corinth was boasting about their tolerance of sinners, ala PacifistAg. Paul is telling them that this point about which they take pride is something for which they should be ashamed. They are not to tolerate the unrepentant sinners among them, but are to exercise their authority and purge them from the church.

That isn't to say that we shouldn't take in the repentant. Of course we should, but for those who will not acknowledge their sinful ways as being ungodly and do not wish to depart from them, they should be purged.

This is the crux of the Church of Hospice versus the Church. I believe Fightin was the first to explain it this way. The first merely provides comfort to the spiritually dying. The second seeks to help God heal the spiritually sick, but will not tolerate the terminal to spread their disease to others. Paul also speaks of this when he says, "Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."

The seeming intolerance of myself and a few others is only the extrapolation of this to the civil authorities for matters of morality. We borrow on Romans 13 for this. The Civil Authority is to punish the evil with the power of the Sword. That is the authority that has been given to them by God. They too have a role to play. It is their role to try and rid society of evil, so that all don't become infected by the cancer of immorality.

I'm not sure where you fall on the Pacifist Spectrum of True Christianity, but don't be fooled by his message of great tolerance. It is the sincerity and truth that will heal the sinner. Jesus never told the adulteress, "you do you, I love you no matter what." He told her, "sin no more."
Remember, patriot, what they took from you. Your nation's identity, its religion, and its people are no more. Remember how we got here.
diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

I'm not sure where you fall on the Pacifist Spectrum of True Christianity, but don't be fooled by his message of great tolerance. It is the sincerity and truth that will heal the sinner. Jesus never told the adulteress, "you do you, I love you no matter what." He told her, "sin no more."

It's crazy the amount of attention we give that part of the story due to our internal judgement of loose women...considering that the rest of the story should give you pause on whether you want a theocracy or not.
Orko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
diehard03 said:

Quote:

I'm not sure where you fall on the Pacifist Spectrum of True Christianity, but don't be fooled by his message of great tolerance. It is the sincerity and truth that will heal the sinner. Jesus never told the adulteress, "you do you, I love you no matter what." He told her, "sin no more."

It's crazy the amount of attention we give that part of the story due to our internal judgement of loose women.
I'm not following. Having read this board for years, that is the part of the story that you all seem to give the least attention to.
Remember, patriot, what they took from you. Your nation's identity, its religion, and its people are no more. Remember how we got here.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
diehard03 said:

Quote:

I'm not sure where you fall on the Pacifist Spectrum of True Christianity, but don't be fooled by his message of great tolerance. It is the sincerity and truth that will heal the sinner. Jesus never told the adulteress, "you do you, I love you no matter what." He told her, "sin no more."

It's crazy the amount of attention we give that part of the story due to our internal judgement of loose women...considering that the rest of the story should give you pause on whether you want a theocracy or not.
I love this story because I think it's such a great example of how we are to be.

1) Very publicly, Christ rebukes the religious elite demanding their pound of flesh
2) Very privately, Christ reassured her that He doesn't condemn her
3) Christ then calls her to repentance

So many want to cast stones, yet Christ said that those without sin should cast the first stone. He also called for repentance of the sinner. It's just a beautiful exchange highlighting his righteousness and mercy.
diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

I'm not following. Having read this board for years, that is the part of the story that you all seem to give the least attention to.

Please. Every other Scripture reference comes back to this.
Orko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PacifistAg said:

diehard03 said:

Quote:

I'm not sure where you fall on the Pacifist Spectrum of True Christianity, but don't be fooled by his message of great tolerance. It is the sincerity and truth that will heal the sinner. Jesus never told the adulteress, "you do you, I love you no matter what." He told her, "sin no more."

It's crazy the amount of attention we give that part of the story due to our internal judgement of loose women...considering that the rest of the story should give you pause on whether you want a theocracy or not.
I love this story because I think it's such a great example of how we are to be.

1) Very publicly, Christ rebukes the religious elite demanding their pound of flesh
2) Very privately, Christ reassured her that He doesn't condemn her
3) Christ then calls her to repentance

So many want to cast stones, yet Christ said that those without sin should cast the first stone. He also called for repentance of the sinner. It's just a beautiful exchange highlighting his righteousness and mercy.

Once again, you fail to perceive the complexity and context of the story. Do you really believe the notoriously heartless Scribes and Pharisees were really dissuaded by the equivalent of, "Hey guys, none of us are perfect, lets give this woman a break."

It is far more likely, and most scholars agree, that Jesus knows that they men are likely guilty of the same sin. He is also likely aware that the required two witnesses needed for a legal execution were not present. If she was truly caught in the act, as they said, then each of them would have been able to cast the first stone, as the witnesses were required to cast the first stones. However, it would have required the man whom they caught her with also be stoned. Jesus has turned the law on the legalistic.

He knew that either there were no witnesses to the "act", and/or that at least one witness was himself of adultery with her, and/or that many (all) of them were also adulterers (likliest, given his comments), and/or that the man would also have to be killed. Due to this, a legal execution could not take place. They would have sinned against God to carry it out.

He calls for the legal process to be carried out and bides his time writing in the dirt. In their shame, they walk.

He then turns to the woman and asks her a legal question, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"

Christ knows that there is no legal basis now for her sentence to be carried out. He has out-lawyered the legalists. Since the legal requirements for her sentence are not present, her appointed judge (Jesus) lets her know that he will not be condemning her.

He then tells her the equivalent of, "You were fortunate this time, but you must cease your sinful behavior!"
Remember, patriot, what they took from you. Your nation's identity, its religion, and its people are no more. Remember how we got here.
kurt vonnegut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well . . . glad I missed all that.

It was an enlightening few pages though. I now sympathize with the pain and suffering Orko and Neon are going through in that they are not permitted to castrate and jail those that don't live by their moral code. . . . Sorry - by God's moral code.
Texaggie7nine
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Christian answer to ISIS
7nine
Neon R
How long do you want to ignore this user?
kurt vonnegut said:

Well . . . glad I missed all that.

It was an enlightening few pages though. I now sympathize with the pain and suffering Orko and Neon are going through in that they are not permitted to castrate and jail those that don't live by their moral code. . . . Sorry - by God's moral code.

Uhhh what? All we did was advocate for the state outlawing no fault divorce. This is apparently a HUGE problem for some people around here. Idk why. The reasons were varied. Orko schooled a number of people with cold brutal authoritarian scripture.

And now Kurt jumps in out of nowhere saying we are "suffering" for some reason. Oh well
FightinTexasAggie08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So sad I was busy today and missed this thread. Glad to see these random other posters I dont know managed to handle things.
StorminAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
FightinTexasAggie08 said:

So sad I was busy today and missed this thread. Glad to see these random other posters I dont know managed to handle things.
I was modding so it stayed under control.
FightinTexasAggie08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Orko said:

FightinTexasAggie08 said:

Texaggie7nine said:

The Christian answer to ISIS


Literally just USA 1776-1920/65/2008, take your pick


Careful, the Foam Sword will be along shortly to tell you that the US from 1776 to 1965 was the most oppressive regime of all time, while completely ignoring the Book of Samuel and God's commands regarding the Amalakites.


He will have pictorial proof of injustices at some point during the history of our country that will eviscerate my argument, and pillage my patriotism, causing me to view everything through Zahnd-esque Kingdom lenses
Grimey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dear Moderators,

As guardians and overseers of the Most Holy authoritarian theocracy of Texags (Blessed be the Aggies), I have a petition for you.

Use your "sword" to punish Brother Orko. His moral degeneracy flies in the face of the accepted moral norms here on Texags. As such, he needs to be punished until he relents and repents from his sinful ways. I will leave the method of righteous discipline up to your pious wisdom, but I would suggest a temporary ban as the initial punitive measure. We must give him every chance to change his degeneracy before we permaban him.

As an adherant to authoritarianism, I'm sure that Orko will be amenable to this punishment, and will surely see the reason and compassion in our "corrective measures." After all, the moral virtue of the Forums is absolute and righteous, has and will always be used correctly, and will never -by definition- be used for oppression.

Thank you for your time,

~Grimey
Orko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Brother Orko is amused and completely unsurprised that the desired reaction to his wrong-think, though completely supported by scripture and honestly discussed on a religion forum, is censorship and banishment.

You do realize that others have implied that I desire torture and murder on this very thread, but I don't ever call for them to be banned. I think you just skerrrd.
Remember, patriot, what they took from you. Your nation's identity, its religion, and its people are no more. Remember how we got here.
tehmackdaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I certainly disagree with your idea of a theocratic state on multiple levels, but I'm glad you clarified your position.
Neon R
How long do you want to ignore this user?
To add on to this. Mods- please ban any reference to the Bible or teachings of the church fathers. They are highly problematic in that they do not call for foam swords or hugs for sinners. They have no place in modern day and anyone citing them should be banned
Seamaster
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"4D chess from Seamaster.

Create socks to build following for your causes. Check.
Post ****storms fairly often to set expectations. Check.
Go against your socks to surprise Pacifist and Beer Baron. Check.
Next step here.
Somewhere, he profits. This is where the 4D chess comes in."

Don't ruin my "Keyzer Soza" moment.
Orko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tehmackdaddy said:

I certainly disagree with your idea of a theocratic state on multiple levels, but I'm glad you clarified your position.


I appreciate your willingness to discuss things that are uncomfortable.
Remember, patriot, what they took from you. Your nation's identity, its religion, and its people are no more. Remember how we got here.
Orko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Neon R said:

To add on to this. Mods- please ban any reference to the Bible or teachings of the church fathers. They are highly problematic in that they do not call for foam swords or hugs for sinners. They have no place in modern day and anyone citing them should be banned


BAHAHAHAHAHA! It's funny cause it's true!
Remember, patriot, what they took from you. Your nation's identity, its religion, and its people are no more. Remember how we got here.
Grimey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Orko said:

Brother Orko is amused and completely unsurprised that the desired reaction to his wrong-think, though completely supported by scripture and honestly discussed on a religion forum, is censorship and banishment.

You do realize that o thers have implied that I desire torture and murder on this very thread, but I don't ever call for them to be banned. I think you just skerrrd.
Brother Orko,

I am scared. I am scared that your degeneracy will lead to the downfall of my race culture forum. I simply wish to return to the days before your turptitude was accepted in public.

Unfortunately for you, the moral imperitive of Texags to eradicate degeneracy supercedes your "rights."

However, I am willing to compromise. Since it is only natural for people of common decent decency to group together for shared advocacy (which I am sure you will agree with), then I believe tha your migration to a different forum with more of your kind would be mutualy beneficial. Our moral purity will be maintained, while you will have a space to practice your "values" in peace.

Please let me know, and I will notify moderators of any agreement we put in place.

~Grimey
FightinTexasAggie08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Grimey said:

Orko said:

Brother Orko is amused and completely unsurprised that the desired reaction to his wrong-think, though completely supported by scripture and honestly discussed on a religion forum, is censorship and banishment.

You do realize that o thers have implied that I desire torture and murder on this very thread, but I don't ever call for them to be banned. I think you just skerrrd.
Brother Orko,

I am scared. I am scared that your degeneracy will lead to the downfall of my race culture forum. I simply wish to return to the days before your turptitude was accepted in public.

Unfortunately for you, the moral imperitive of Texags to eradicate degeneracy supercedes your "rights."

However, I am willing to compromise. Since it is only natural for people of common decent decency to group together for shared advocacy (which I am sure you will agree with), then I believe tha your migration to a different forum with more of your kind would be mutualy beneficial. Our moral purity will be maintained, while you will have a space to practice your "values" in peace.

Please let me know, and I will notify moderators of any agreement we put in place.

~Grimey


Throw grimey down the well
tehmackdaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Orko said:

tehmackdaddy said:

I certainly disagree with your idea of a theocratic state on multiple levels, but I'm glad you clarified your position.


I appreciate your willingness to discuss things that are uncomfortable.

I'm not uncomfortable. What gives you that idea?
Orko
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tehmackdaddy said:

Orko said:

tehmackdaddy said:

I certainly disagree with your idea of a theocratic state on multiple levels, but I'm glad you clarified your position.


I appreciate your willingness to discuss things that are uncomfortable.

I'm not uncomfortable. What gives you that idea?


Even better, as I meant it as a compliment.
Remember, patriot, what they took from you. Your nation's identity, its religion, and its people are no more. Remember how we got here.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.