Is calling Beanieboy a . . .

Is calling Beanieboy a . . .


  • Total voters
    81

Caille

New member
Bowser said:
I've been given negative reputation.

Can someone explain why it's okay to point out homos and call them faggots, but why it's not okay to point out the fat, gluttonous pigs that call themselves Christian but defy God's teachings about gluttony and laziness?



Because wholearmour is one of the regulars around here - welcome to the club, you'll have to navigate your way through the cliques on your own....
 

julie21

New member
Agape4Robin said:
Julie, I'd give you a rep point for your last post, but alas.........
"you must spread around more points before giving them to Julie again." :doh: :bang:
That's okay. :) See, sometimes we do agree ;)
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Caille said:
I just knew one of you childish idiots was going to bang that drum
It's a valid point. Why don't you respond to it instead of ignoring it, or can't you do that? :rolleyes:
 

Caille

New member
Lucky said:
Parents should be concerned about their child's health. :up:



Yeah, I can just see a concerned Christian parent going into their child's room in the morning with a bullhorn:

"OK Lardbutt, outta the bed! Go on, get them piggy legs over the edge! You're so disgusting you make me want to puke!"

Christian love, indeed.

Are we not all children of God ?
 

Agape4Robin

Member
Caille said:
Yeah, I can just see a concerned Christian parent going into their child's room in the morning with a bullhorn:

"OK Lardbutt, outta the bed! Go on, get them piggy legs over the edge! You're so disgusting you make me want to puke!"

Christian love, indeed.

Are we not all children of God ?
Good point! :BRAVO:
 

Nineveh

Merely Christian
Bowser said:
I apologize for pointing someone out when I could have made my point just as well by being general and non-specific. If a moderator reads this, I ask that they please delete the harmful post I initially made making the accusation of obesity.

Thank you for acknowledging my point. It saddens me to see Christians adopt bigoted slur-words under the guise of "just tellin' it like it is" and "not waterin' down the painful truth" when the simple fact of the matter is that you can be just as persuasive, powerful, and effective, without calling people Faggots, Fat Pigs, Kikes, or Ragheads. If you have to resort to using historically painful words then you don't have very much to say at all.

Rather, I think your posts should stand.

What's really sad is WA isn't going to hell for his weight, beanieboy is going to hell for being a sodomite. Not once have you bothered to witness to him on this thread. Why not give an example of how you witness to homosexuals? Surely you don't only judge Christians.
 

Caille

New member
Frank Ernest said:
Actually, in my family, if anyone used the words "whore" or "slut" in direct reference to an actual person, the punishment would have been swift, certain and sure. Why? Because that's a moral and behavioral judgment not to be made lightly.



Good point Frank - I had been wondering lately what kind of upbringing some of the posters here have had. To even argue over some of this stuff seems surreal. I mean, never mind WWJD. What would your mother think ?
 

Ecumenicist

New member
Nineveh said:
Rather, I think your posts should stand.

What's really sad is WA isn't going to hell for his weight, beanieboy is going to hell for being a sodomite. Not once have you bothered to witness to him on this thread. Why not give an example of how you witness to homosexuals? Surely you don't only judge Christians.

How can you say that? 7 deadly sins? Envy, Sloth, Gluttonly, Wrath, Pride, Lust, Greed.

No homosexuality in that list, but there is sloth, gluttony, and wrath.

I'm not saying that WA is subject to any of these sins, and I object to the implication, 2 wrongs
don't make a right.

But, if someone is slave to overindulging, they are in more danger of hell than a homosexual person
who has none of these sins.

And no, being homo doesn't guarantee lustfullness, any more than being hetero guarantees it.
 

Caille

New member
Clete said:
It's a valid point. Why don't you respond to it instead of ignoring it, or can't you do that? :rolleyes:



It's not a valid point, it's semantic masturbation. Go for it if it makes you feel good.
 

Nineveh

Merely Christian
Dave Miller said:
How can you say that? 7 deadly sins? Envy, Sloth, Gluttonly, Wrath, Pride, Lust, Greed.

Since when did you become catholic?

How about this list?

These six things the LORD hates, Yes, seven are an abomination to Him: A proud look, A lying tongue, Hands that shed innocent blood, A heart that devises wicked plans, Feet that are swift in running to evil, A false witness who speaks lies, And one who sows discord among brethren.

No homosexuality in that list, but there is sloth, gluttony, and wrath.

I once gave you 12 witnesses against sexual immorality, you ignored them all.

I'm not saying that WA is subject to any of these sins, and I object to the implication, 2 wrongs
don't make a right.

Since you also believe God commits sin, I am not surprized you believe being over weight is a sin as well. All is sin according to dave, except what a Holy and Righteous God calls sin.

But, if someone is slave to overindulging, they are in more danger of hell than a homosexual person
who has none of these sins.

And no, being homo doesn't guarantee lustfullness, any more than being hetero guarantees it.

You are a lover of perversness who comforts sin. You are a blind fool.
 

Agape4Robin

Member
Caledvwlch said:
I can't believe we are still talking about this...:doh:
Morning,Cal..... :D
I have been arguing with my so- called brother and sisters in Christ about this until 2:30 a.m., but to no avail.... :bang:
 

Caledvwlch

New member
Agape4Robin said:
Morning,Cal..... :D
I have been arguing with my so- called brother and sisters in Christ about this until 2:30 a.m., but to no avail.... :bang:
I saw that. I was impressed. Not that my opinion matters, but it was heartening after some of the stuff I read.
 
Top