Woman's Allah is gay protest sign confiscated by UK police

[MindWars]

Woman’s “Allah is Gay” Protest Sign Confiscated By UK Police
During an #Exeter event featuring speakers Milo Yiannopoulos and Sargon of Akkad, a woman holding a sign allegedly reading “Allah is Gay” had her property ripped from her hands by a police officer.



Sure is their right to say that, it is their right to think it leftist scum think doing this takes away thoughts lmfao!! You really are pathetically stupid.

 

[BlackFlag]

Allah has never existed, however there is some writing that supports the idea that the potentially real Jesus character was gay

 

[The Irish Ram]

What writings would that be?

 

[BlackFlag]

What writings would that be?

Interpretations of John and Mark, including some non-canonical Mark, using the context of the period of history in which it all happened.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Some speculate he was married to Mary Magdalene

 

[BlackFlag]

Some speculate he was married to Mary Magdalene

True

 

[The Irish Ram]

John and Mark need no interpretation. And nowhere does John or Mark say that Jesus had sexual relations with a man. Made up bullshit by interpreters is what you are trying to sell as credible. It is not...

 

[The Irish Ram]

Some speculate he was married to Mary Magdalene

If Christ was married to Mary, the disciples would have said so. Nowhere do they say Christ was married to anyone but His church. More ridiculous interpretation...

 

[BlackFlag]

John and Mark need no interpretation. And nowhere does John or Mark say that Jesus had sexual relations with a man. Made up bullshit by interpreters is what you are trying to sell as credible. It is not...

All denominations provide their own interpretations. Also, all religions can be considered made up bullshit trying to be sold as credible. So your argument carries no more or less weight than any other on this topic.

Anyways, back to the topic, the person should be allowed to say Allah or Jesus or Zeus are all butt raping pirates if they want.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Some speculate he was married to Mary Magdalene

If Christ was married to Mary, the disciples would have said so. Nowhere do they say Christ was married to anyone but His church. More ridiculous interpretation...

Of course, because everything in various texts written 1500 years ago and subject to translation to different languages over and over as well as edits by church officials over the centuries, is literally 100% accurate.

Right, Tard-a-roni?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

What has Christ got to do with allah?

 

[BlackFlag]

What has Christ got to do with allah?

What does bugs bunny have to do with mickey mouse? Both are cartoons.

 

[Lysistrata]

Why was this idiotic woman holding up a sign that said "God is gay"? Was her purpose in using the Arabic word for God to incite violence and hatred for another religion? She certainly is as dumb as a box of rocks.The UK just has more stringent laws than we do, and the cops have responsibility to keep the peace.

 

[The Irish Ram]

John and Mark need no interpretation. And nowhere does John or Mark say that Jesus had sexual relations with a man. Made up bullshit by interpreters is what you are trying to sell as credible. It is not...

All denominations provide their own interpretations. Also, all religions can be considered made up bullshit trying to be sold as credible. So your argument carries no more or less weight than any other on this topic.

Anyways, back to the topic, the person should be allowed to say Allah or Jesus or Zeus are all butt raping pirates if they want.

Interpreting has caused Christ's church to fracture into over 30,000 denominations. Which I imagine is why God said not to add to what is said, or take away from it. No need to interpret. Just read it.

One religion proved itself. Christ came back from the dead and was seen by many. Had He not done that, there would have been no Christians to feed to the lions or impaled and torched to light the gardens with.
You have offered nothing in your defense other than, someone interpreted. That shit comes from, "Christ kissed Mary on the lips". Men kissed men on the lips too. That was the history of the time. Christ made provision for His mother while on the cross, He made no provision for MaryM at the cross. There was no obligation to do so.

 

[BlackFlag]

John and Mark need no interpretation. And nowhere does John or Mark say that Jesus had sexual relations with a man. Made up bullshit by interpreters is what you are trying to sell as credible. It is not...

All denominations provide their own interpretations. Also, all religions can be considered made up bullshit trying to be sold as credible. So your argument carries no more or less weight than any other on this topic.

Anyways, back to the topic, the person should be allowed to say Allah or Jesus or Zeus are all butt raping pirates if they want.

Interpreting has caused Christ's church to fracture into over 30,000 denominations. Which I imagine is why God said not to add to what is said, or take away from it. No need to interpret. Just read it.

One religion proved itself. Christ came back from the dead and was seen by many. Had He not done that, there would have been no Christians to feed to the lions or impaled and torched to light the gardens with.
You have offered nothing in your defense other than, someone interpreted. That shit comes from, "Christ kissed Mary on the lips". Men kissed men on the lips too. That was the history of the time. Christ made provision for His mother while on the cross, He made no provision for MaryM at the cross. There was no obligation to do so.

What you believe is an interpretation. You disagree with other’s interpretations, and they disagree with yours. You are not special.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Some speculate he was married to Mary Magdalene

If Christ was married to Mary, the disciples would have said so. Nowhere do they say Christ was married to anyone but His church. More ridiculous interpretation...

Of course, because everything in various texts written 1500 years ago and subject to translation to different languages over and over as well as edits by church officials over the centuries, is literally 100% accurate.

Right, Tard-a-roni?

And... you are wrong.
If you want to know if translating has altered the text then you do a side by side comparison with the originals. The Pentateuch or the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Historians. Get a Bible that includes them all and see for yourself whether or not the original messaged has been changed. You don't have to leave one thing to "interpretation". The King James compares well and can be trusted.

When is the last time you opened one to compare translations, to prove your claim?
If He was gay, if he had a wife, we would have been told so. He was not and did not.
He is a bride groom, awaiting the arrival of His bride.

"Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready."

^ Revelation. Yet to come. He is the groom, His church is His bride.

 

[The Irish Ram]

John and Mark need no interpretation. And nowhere does John or Mark say that Jesus had sexual relations with a man. Made up bullshit by interpreters is what you are trying to sell as credible. It is not...

All denominations provide their own interpretations. Also, all religions can be considered made up bullshit trying to be sold as credible. So your argument carries no more or less weight than any other on this topic.

Anyways, back to the topic, the person should be allowed to say Allah or Jesus or Zeus are all butt raping pirates if they want.

Interpreting has caused Christ's church to fracture into over 30,000 denominations. Which I imagine is why God said not to add to what is said, or take away from it. No need to interpret. Just read it.

One religion proved itself. Christ came back from the dead and was seen by many. Had He not done that, there would have been no Christians to feed to the lions or impaled and torched to light the gardens with.
You have offered nothing in your defense other than, someone interpreted. That shit comes from, "Christ kissed Mary on the lips". Men kissed men on the lips too. That was the history of the time. Christ made provision for His mother while on the cross, He made no provision for MaryM at the cross. There was no obligation to do so.

What you believe is an interpretation. You disagree with other’s interpretations, and they disagree with yours. You are not special.

Nor am I stupid. When you read, "Christ said, go and sin no more" It means, "Go, and sin no more". It means that in English, in Spanish, in Greek, in Ancient Greek, Russian... It meant that then, it meant that when it was translated into Greek, it means that in the KJV.

When I read that it went dark at noon when Christ hung on the cross, it means, in any language, that it went dark at noon when Christ hung on the cross.
That philosophers in real time pondered why it went dark at noon, is credence. No interpretation necessary. It was what it says it was...

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Actually, we're getting off the topic. Jesus being married is not the topic of discussion; it's the suppression of free speech in the UK.