Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
a text exists.
It's not a gospel.
It's an ancient Coptic text, dated from the third or fourth century. It is purportedly conversations between Jesus and Judas.
How much would it shock you to know that "old" does not mean "truthful"? And by the way, "gospel" is not defined as "ancient Coptic texts".
DAMN that whole language thing!
Very Christian of you. I can see my posts really get under your skin. Why not put me on ignore?
Believe me if you aggravated me to the point where I'd use the C word, (which I've never used in my life), I'd put YOU on ignore.
Wow, NOW the self-proclaimed Buddhist wants to tell me whether or not my behavior is Christian. The arrogance is getting really deep in here.
Believe me, your personal view of words and how they should be used is STILL completely personal and not universal to everyone else, just as it was the LAST time you tried to impose your verbal rules on me. Let me translate into smaller words, because I know you need it: YOU consider "****" to be taboo; I don't. You don't have to aggravate me to be called one; you just have to BE one.
It's probably time you stop flattering yourself that you matter enough to upset me, aside from my general distaste for stupid people.
I'm not calling you any names, am I? I'm not putting you down. I find it ironic that you get so angry about someone misquoting the Bible.
Why does that bother you so much? There are no requirements here for people to be Bible scholars in order to have an opinion.
As for your use of the C word. I never use it. I think it's one of the most offensive words a woman can be called. I'm sorry that you are so careless in your speech that you use it.
Why were you posting to me? I wasn't involved in that sub-topic.Some people have no sense of humor.
I have a wonderful sense of humor. However, I have no desire to see you naked. Some jokes are just TOO over the top.
First of all, I wasn't posting to YOU. I was posting to daveman.
Oh, I hope he doesn't off himself. He'd deprive us of such entertainment.That would be his lack of self-awareness. If he could actually see the hate-filled, pompous, hypocritical, imbecilic bigot the rest of us see when we look at him, he'd probably commit suicide, instead of coming here and letting us all laugh derisively at him.
That's kind of you to wish for his long life. He sure knows how to get on your nerves.
Wow, NOW the self-proclaimed Buddhist wants to tell me whether or not my behavior is Christian. The arrogance is getting really deep in here.
Believe me, your personal view of words and how they should be used is STILL completely personal and not universal to everyone else, just as it was the LAST time you tried to impose your verbal rules on me. Let me translate into smaller words, because I know you need it: YOU consider "****" to be taboo; I don't. You don't have to aggravate me to be called one; you just have to BE one.
It's probably time you stop flattering yourself that you matter enough to upset me, aside from my general distaste for stupid people.
I'm not calling you any names, am I? I'm not putting you down. I find it ironic that you get so angry about someone misquoting the Bible.
Why does that bother you so much? There are no requirements here for people to be Bible scholars in order to have an opinion.
As for your use of the C word. I never use it. I think it's one of the most offensive words a woman can be called. I'm sorry that you are so careless in your speech that you use it.
And I continue to wait in vain for you to say something relevant.
I don't care what language you do or don't use. Why should I? You've long since proven you don't understand the concept of "language", anyway, so it hardly makes a difference how you wield a tool you don't comprehend.
Why does arrogant stupidity bother me? If you have to ask, it's just another thing you don't understand.
I'll agree with you on one thing: I think "****" is one of the most offensive words a woman can be called. That's why I use it so sparingly, and only on women who richly deserve it. There's nothing "careless" about it.
This is a messageboard. Nobody has to be a Christian scholar to comment on Bible passages that we've all been exposed to, whether we chose it or not.
If I were you, I would consider how posting like this helps you as a Christian.
So I was right: You ARE a proponent of people gassing away without education. What a surprise!
If I were you, I would consider how much anyone cares what YOU think about Christians. And by the way, Reverend Ignoramus, before you attempt to impose your SO-expert opinion that "Christians should be mealymouthed and ineffectual" on others, you might want to have someone read you the part about the Apostle Paul, who wasn't known for being a very nice person after his conversion, either. I figure some of us have to kick ass on behalf of all the other Christians who are too nice and inoffensive to manage it.
I support people who post here no matter what educational background they have. Everyone has a right to state their opinion.
Jesus spoke gently and kindly. He wasn't "kickass" or militant, like you are.
Oh, I hope he doesn't off himself. He'd deprive us of such entertainment.That would be his lack of self-awareness. If he could actually see the hate-filled, pompous, hypocritical, imbecilic bigot the rest of us see when we look at him, he'd probably commit suicide, instead of coming here and letting us all laugh derisively at him.
You realize that cc looks down on you as much as she does on everyone else, right?
You hush. Wonky says you think you're better than me.Oh, I hope he doesn't off himself. He'd deprive us of such entertainment.That would be his lack of self-awareness. If he could actually see the hate-filled, pompous, hypocritical, imbecilic bigot the rest of us see when we look at him, he'd probably commit suicide, instead of coming here and letting us all laugh derisively at him.
No worries. People (and I use the term loosely) like Wonky are incapable of introspection.
Now, now, a liberal has spoken. That defines reality...at least in his mind.Oh, I hope he doesn't off himself. He'd deprive us of such entertainment.
You realize that cc looks down on you as much as she does on everyone else, right?
Wow, there's really no end of subjects on which you can make a totally incorrect jackass of yourself.
I like dave just fine. HE isn't an uneducated, hate-filled bigot.
Oh, I hope he doesn't off himself. He'd deprive us of such entertainment.
You realize that cc looks down on you as much as she does on everyone else, right?
Really? You can read her mind? Because none of her posts to me reflect this amusing alternate view of reality that lets you pretend she's not kicking your ass.
Now, now, a liberal has spoken. That defines reality...at least in his mind.You realize that cc looks down on you as much as she does on everyone else, right?
Wow, there's really no end of subjects on which you can make a totally incorrect jackass of yourself.
I like dave just fine. HE isn't an uneducated, hate-filled bigot.
You weren't responding to me, because you didn't quote me.First of all, I wasn't posting to YOU. I was posting to daveman.
Second, I think it's funny you would think about me being naked. I have no such thoughts of you.
Really? You were posting to Daveman . . . by quoting MY post? See, that's where that whole "illiterate ****" thing keeps tripping you up. People who understand English would have known they needed to add that little word called a "name" to specify a poster different from the one you're quoting.
Of course you aren't thinking about me naked. Unlike you, I don't have to strip to get a laugh.
Check the post again. I was responding to daveman. He had responded to you, so your post was included.
One thing I never do, is use the c word, to anyone. Even someone as unpleasant as you.
Nope. I take full responsibility for my objectionable views. As far as this thread is concerned, my chief objectionable view, is that Wonky poster has a right to say whatever he choose to.
No, your chief objectionable view - aside from the curious belief that you have something meaningful to say about the practice of a religion you don't profess - is that ONLY Wonky has a right to say whatever he chooses to.
That's not true. Wonky has a right to post his opinion, and so do you. His posts aren't as ugly as yours are.
So I was right: You ARE a proponent of people gassing away without education. What a surprise!
If I were you, I would consider how much anyone cares what YOU think about Christians. And by the way, Reverend Ignoramus, before you attempt to impose your SO-expert opinion that "Christians should be mealymouthed and ineffectual" on others, you might want to have someone read you the part about the Apostle Paul, who wasn't known for being a very nice person after his conversion, either. I figure some of us have to kick ass on behalf of all the other Christians who are too nice and inoffensive to manage it.
I support people who post here no matter what educational background they have. Everyone has a right to state their opinion.
Jesus spoke gently and kindly. He wasn't "kickass" or militant, like you are.
It's funny how much easier it is to be nice to people when you know you could smite them with a thunderbolt, and just choose not to.
Everyone has a purpose in life. Mine doesn't happen to be being the Messiah. And I should point out that when JESUS got upset about how people were perverting His Father's teachings, HE grabbed a whip and drove them out of the temple. All I'm doing is using rough language. Wimp much?
If everyone has a right to state their opinion, how come you feel you have a right to jump my shit for stating my opinion that Wonky is an uneducated shitwad spouting off about a subject he knows nothing about? I'm not sure I even said he shouldn't talk about it, or if I just said he shouldn't expect anyone to respect what he has to say about it.
Yes and no. It exists, but it's not recognized by anyone - except Gnostics and anti-Christian bigots - as being part of the Bible.
a text exists.
It's not a gospel.
It's an ancient Coptic text, dated from the third or fourth century. It is purportedly conversations between Jesus and Judas.
It's an ancient Coptic text, dated from the third or fourth century. It is purportedly conversations between Jesus and Judas.
How much would it shock you to know that "old" does not mean "truthful"? And by the way, "gospel" is not defined as "ancient Coptic texts".
DAMN that whole language thing!
I'm sure you haven't read it, yet you have an opinion about it. Just sayin....
I'm interested in Gnostic writings. This is the first I've heard about the Gospel of Judas. National Geographic is doing a special on it.
No, your chief objectionable view - aside from the curious belief that you have something meaningful to say about the practice of a religion you don't profess - is that ONLY Wonky has a right to say whatever he chooses to.
That's not true. Wonky has a right to post his opinion, and so do you. His posts aren't as ugly as yours are.
I'm sure that you consider this OP to be kind, thoughtful, and innocently attempting to open a meaningful dialogue, rather than constituting an ill-mannered, crass attack on Christians that is utterly undeserving of anything but contempt:
If Jesus couldn't keep HIMSELF out of trouble...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...how do you expect him to save you?
This seems like a fatal theological flaw if ever there was one.
On the other hand, I believe we've already established that you're a brain-damaged, agenda-driven, bigoted hypocrite.
My feeling is, if you throw the first punch, you have no business whining about getting hit back. And if you jump into the fight on the side of the idiot who started it, you have no business whining if you get your ass stomped alongside him.
Snivel to someone who thinks you and your butt-buddy, Wonky, have done something here to deserve a modicum of courtesy. I think you're getting exactly what you both asked for.
Rhetorically speaking, of course.You realize that cc looks down on you as much as she does on everyone else, right?
Really? You can read her mind? Because none of her posts to me reflect this amusing alternate view of reality that lets you pretend she's not kicking your ass.
Is kicking people's asses a Christian value?
I never said he doesn't, did I?Now, now, a liberal has spoken. That defines reality...at least in his mind.Wow, there's really no end of subjects on which you can make a totally incorrect jackass of yourself.
I like dave just fine. HE isn't an uneducated, hate-filled bigot.
He has as much right to state his opinion as you do.
How much would it shock you to know that "old" does not mean "truthful"? And by the way, "gospel" is not defined as "ancient Coptic texts".
DAMN that whole language thing!
I'm sure you haven't read it, yet you have an opinion about it. Just sayin....
I'm interested in Gnostic writings. This is the first I've heard about the Gospel of Judas. National Geographic is doing a special on it.
I also haven't read "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion". I don't have to pore over something to know it's a pile of shit and a hoax . . . although if I wanted to hold forth at length on SPECIFIC PARTS of it, I would at that point feel compelled to at least read them once, which is what differentiates me from your soulmate, Wonky.
Be interested in whatever the flip you want. Who cares? Just don't try to foist them onto our religion as sacred texts.
