Albert Tatlock Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 How can rational human beings believe such codswallop, and moreover, e.g. refuse to let their own kids accept blood transfusions that would save their lives? I think thats Jehovahs Witnesses you are thinking of Albert Thanks, noted. But they don't accept alcohol - that's even worse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjDan Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 How can rational human beings believe such codswallop, and moreover, e.g. refuse to let their own kids accept blood transfusions that would save their lives? Oh... here we go again. ANOTHER misconception. Mate, that's not us! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjDan Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 How can rational human beings believe such codswallop, and moreover, e.g. refuse to let their own kids accept blood transfusions that would save their lives? I think thats Jehovahs Witnesses you are thinking of Albert Thanks, noted. But they don't accept alcohol - that's even worse! Refusing to drink alcohol is worse than refusing to accept blood..... well done Albert! Genius. With that kinda logic, well.... I'd have to forgive you for all your other postings. *looks at Albert. Nods, smiles.* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 No one has still come forward to explain how these mormon missionaries can be defined as "bible bashers" (which is the original claim) lol.... but i guess with the intellect of this board, that's hardly suprising. Bible Basher: slang A vigorous, aggressive or dogmatic Christian preacher. If you really class believing in all that guff as 'intellect' - then you truly are in another dimension to me (the second dimension I suspect). I'll stick to physics, mathematics and the real world thanks - not some version of 'reality' you choose to accept, mainly because you don't really understand the physical world that surrounds you and can't be arsed trying to work it out for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjDan Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 No one has still come forward to explain how these mormon missionaries can be defined as "bible bashers" (which is the original claim) lol.... but i guess with the intellect of this board, that's hardly suprising. Bible Basher: slang A vigorous, aggressive or dogmatic Christian preacher. If you really class believing in all that guff as 'intellect' - then you truly are in another dimension to me (the second dimension I suspect). I'll stick to physics, mathematics and the real world thanks - not some version of 'reality' you choose to accept, mainly because you don't really understand the physical world that surrounds you and can't be arsed trying to work it out for yourself. Is that your own definition? Every other definition refers to one who aggressively 'thumps' his bible in action and/or speech. Mormon missionaries are not aggressive. They are not Bible Bashers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 words..but i guess with the intellect of this board, that's hardly suprising. and that's what we usually call "Online Forum Suicide" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Is that your own definition? Every other definition refers to one who aggressively 'thumps' his bible in action and/or speech. Mormon missionaries are not aggressive. They are not Bible Bashers. That definition was from allwords.com. Most of the other definitions are the same if you google i.e. MSN Encarta: 'a vehement promoter of Christianity: a committed Christian whose outspoken evangelizing is regarded by some as extreme ( slang ) ( offensive ) ' I find Mormons aggressive i.e. that they have tended to persist after I have been assertive saying (politely) 'I am not interested thank you'. In my book, anyone that fails to respond to a personal assertion is being aggressive. I am never rude on the doorstep, but whilst patrolling the interweb disguised as Albert Tatlock I choose to say how I really feel. You choose to come here at the risk of being offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 I am never rude on the doorstep, but whilst patrolling the interweb disguised as Albert Tatlock I choose to say how I really feel. You choose to come here at the risk of being offended. This even worst than being told Santa doesnt exist. [i can still remember my anger as a child on learning I had been lied to] Now to discover you are not really Albert Tatlock ..and I so wanted to believe you are he. I feel really let down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 but i guess with the intellect of this board, that's hardly suprising. I'd recommend you toddle off back to christianforums.com then where you can bask in their warm embrace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumble Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 ALBERT TATLOCK HAS THE MAGIC TWIGS... People, stop bitching for thou art SAVED. Saved I tell thee. For Albert, the Saint of Departed Soap Characters has trod verily on the plantations of South Barrule bringing succour and relief to the Ramblers and Mountainbikers and the Magic Twigs have appeared to him like the Word of Dog. For as it is written in the Book of Minnie Caldwell, Magic Twigs will make a fire to consume all the evils of mankind. Unless they are fat twigs which go white in the sun and make a mess of your Goretex skids. Follow, follow Albert. His name shall be spoken in hushed tongues by the Sons of Dog henceforward and ever unto Erin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I think it would be a good idea to direct DjDan - and anyone else who is interested in the LDS (Mormons) to THIS PAGE and see if there are any answers to such matters as: In 1828, eight years after he supposedly had been told by God himself to join no church, Joseph Smith applied for membership in a local Methodist church. Contemporaries of Smith consistently described him as something of a confidence man, whose chief source of income was hiring out to local farmers to help them find buried treasure by the use of folk magic and "seer stones." Smith was actually tried in 1826 on a charge of moneydigging. Smith produced most of the "translation" not by reading the plates through the Urim and Thummim (described as a pair of sacred spectacles), but by gazing at the same "seer stone" he had used for treasure hunting. He would place the stone into his hat, and then cover his face with it. For much of the time he was dictating, the gold plates were not even present, but in a hiding place. The detailed history and civilization described in the Book of Mormon does not correspond to anything found by archaeologists anywhere in the Americas. The secret temple ritual (the "endowment") was introduced by Smith in May, 1842, just two months after he had been initiated into Freemasonry. The LDS temple ritual closely resembles the Masonic ritual of that day. Joseph Smith died not as a martyr, but in a gun battle in which he fired a number of shots. He was in jail at the time, under arrest for having ordered the destruction of a Nauvoo newspaper which dared to print an exposure (which was true) of his secret sexual liaisons. And if you do join the church You will be expected to donate at least ten percent of your income to the church as tithing. Other donations will be expected as the need arises. You will never see an accounting of how this money is spent, or how much the church receives, or anything at all about its financial condition; the church keeps its finances secret, even from its members. There. That ought to keep the b*****d occupied for a while! (I hate proselytizing religions!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I hate proselytizing religions! Even the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Check out Here and Here WHY YOU SHOULD CONVERT TO FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTERISM Flimsy Moral Standards. We don’t ban coveting your neighbour’s ox etc. Every Friday is a religious holiday Our heaven is WAY better. We’ve got a Stripper Factory AND a Beer Volcano We have evidence that a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe. None of us, of course, were around to see it, but we have written accounts of it. We have several lengthy volumes explaining all details of His power. Also, you may be surprised to hear that there are over 10 million of us, and growing. We tend to be very secretive, as many people claim our beliefs are not substantiated by observable evidence. It is absolutely imperative that they realize that observable evidence is at the discretion of a Flying Spaghetti Monster. Furthermore, it is disrespectful to teach our beliefs without wearing His chosen outfit, which of course is full pirate regalia. You may be interested to know that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s. For your interest, I have included a graph of the approximate number of pirates versus the average global temperature over the last 200 years. As you can see, there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between pirates and global temperature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I was tempted, but it was revealed to me in a dream that the Flying Spaghetti Monster was actually a pseudonym for Emerald Airways. I am now studying the sacred words of the 'Isle of Man Examiner' after making the discovery that it's an anagram of 'Feminine amoral sex'. The truth will not be denied! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Honest this is true. Right on cue, couldn't have asked for better timing - two granny Jehovahs witnesses just arrived on my doorstep. Seemed very suprised and very perplexed when I said "No thanks, I'm not interested. I'm actually a follower of the Flying Spaghetti Monster". They soon buzzed off. It worked well - you should give it a try next time they visit you. Worked nearly as good as when I get indian telephone sales people on the line and tell them "that *Albert Tatlock is actually dead and wouldn't probably need to save money on his phone contract thanks". Soon gets you off their lists too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 May I just make it clear to you... in our church there is NO PAID CLERGY. That means no church leader gets paid, and neither do the misionaries. Clearly then... it's not for the money OR the numbers. Just a question DjDan ... Is it or is it not true that: "Today all faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints contribute one tenth of their income as tithing." Because if they do the leaders of the church have a very strong interest in getting a many converts as possible. To ignore the monetery incentive this gives for prosletizing is nieve in the extreme. You say no church leader gets paid. I presume this is an honest statement, but are you also saying there are no perks attached with being a leader in the church. No church houses, furnished to be lived in, no church funded meals, or transport etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.