Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Conflicting statements from God's marketing department....

4 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Guest


Guest

It's tough to get some folk on track so they all work together as a cohesive unit, especially when the Home Office is out of pocket while the Western Marketing Mgr. is making decisions above his pay grade.

America’s top Catholic calls for renewed wave of anti-LGBT sentiment

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/26/americas-top-catholic-calls-for-renewed-wave-of-anti-lgbt-sentiment/

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the Pope has declared that there will be atheists in Heaven.


A cognitive dissonance straight from God....?




Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

I expected the pope to be agin queers. But how did he decide that atheists are going to heaven?
And what if the atheist is a queer, does he get into heaven too?



Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

I hope they don't show the Pope the movie "Behind the Candelbra".
I'm watching it right now and if the Pope saw this he would probably have a heart attack. It's got Michael Douglas and Matt Damon kissing each other in it. This really is a sign that America has hit bottom (no pun intended).

Yella

Yella

Bob wrote:I hope they don't show the Pope the movie "Behind the Candelbra".
I'm watching it right now and if the Pope saw this he would probably have a heart attack. It's got Michael Douglas and Matt Damon kissing each other in it. This really is a sign that America has hit bottom (no pun intended).

Thinking about the many Catholic priests that enjoy raping their altar boys.
Would those priests be "Queers" (really queer behavior) or would they be Athiests? A priest who does that is instantly no longer a priest even if the Bishop lets it slide. And the Bishop who lets it slide is instantly no longer a Bishop or a even a priest. They renounced their solemn oaths by their actions,They should both turn in their Roman collars and go out looking for a job. All the fancy gold braid and satin robes they wear with the funny hats are a ridiculous joke. But millions of Catholics live out their lives in fear of the wrath of the Church almost like they did during the time the Inquisition was running rampant with the monster Torquemada killing people every day probably with a towering erection that the makers of Viagra would love to duplicate.

http://warpedinblue,blogspot.com/

Guest


Guest

Yella wrote:
Bob wrote:I hope they don't show the Pope the movie "Behind the Candelbra".
I'm watching it right now and if the Pope saw this he would probably have a heart attack. It's got Michael Douglas and Matt Damon kissing each other in it. This really is a sign that America has hit bottom (no pun intended).

Thinking about the many Catholic priests that enjoy raping their altar boys.
Would those priests be "Queers" (really queer behavior) or would they be Athiests? A priest who does that is instantly no longer a priest even if the Bishop lets it slide. And the Bishop who lets it slide is instantly no longer a Bishop or a even a priest. They renounced their solemn oaths by their actions,They should both turn in their Roman collars and go out looking for a job. All the fancy gold braid and satin robes they wear with the funny hats are a ridiculous joke. But millions of Catholics live out their lives in fear of the wrath of the Church almost like they did during the time the Inquisition was running rampant with the monster Torquemada killing people every day probably with a towering erection that the makers of Viagra would love to duplicate.

..............................................

Very well stated.


I have friends who are Catholics, and this is never a topic of our discussions. We just don't go there, and for the most part, that's what I think the vast majority of the public choose to do.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Yella wrote:

Thinking about the many Catholic priests that enjoy raping their altar boys.
Would those priests be "Queers" (really queer behavior) or would they be Athiests?

Both. To be sexually stimulated by a member of the same sex requires that someone be queer.
And if someone diddles children he cannot possibly believe that behaviour is in harmony with jesus. Just because Jesus never had a girlfriend and was most likely queer himself doesn't matter. There is nothing in the bible to suggest that jesus diddled children like mohammed in the koran.
So those priests are both atheist and queer.

Guest


Guest

Bob wrote:
Yella wrote:

Thinking about the many Catholic priests that enjoy raping their altar boys.
Would those priests be "Queers" (really queer behavior) or would they be Athiests?

Both. To be sexually stimulated by a member of the same sex requires that someone be queer.
And if someone diddles children he cannot possibly believe that behaviour is in harmony with jesus. Just because Jesus never had a girlfriend and was most likely queer himself doesn't matter. There is nothing in the bible to suggest that jesus diddled children like mohammed in the koran.
So those priests are both atheist and queer.

Conflicting statements from God's marketing department.... Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR4AtU8Ut6iHFU2Z73PEOsMc01ohVvza3Hs232nJvzVwigCKBTd

How do you know Jesus didn't have a girlfriend... or possibly... a wife?

*****SMILE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIwZVG5wMi8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfL5f6cZlk8

Smile

Sal

Sal

Yeah!

Jebus was banging the shit out of that Mary Magdalene slut.

Hollywood done told me so.

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

Christ was the Groom the church was his Bride...any other arrangement is ridiculous. He came here to teach us spirituality not carnality....

Therefore as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. 25Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, …

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:Yeah!

Jebus was banging the shit out of that Mary Magdalene slut.

Hollywood done told me so.

Conflicting statements from God's marketing department.... Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRPTwgM0qzEGK3x_um61fkWJhvy24qMOV1SHyGJCKgmi8X-87roEg

I read the Agnostic gospels and other works long before Dan Brown wrote the Da Vinci Code so you predilection towards ridicule is inept at best...

...Between that and your minuscule memory retention about my religious beliefs makes you even more pathetic.

*****SMILE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AA64eCt2zs

Smile



Last edited by Damaged Eagle on 5/28/2013, 1:02 pm; edited 1 time in total

Sal

Sal

Damaged Eagle wrote:
Sal wrote:Yeah!

Jebus was banging the shit out of that Mary Magdalene slut.

Hollywood done told me so.

Conflicting statements from God's marketing department.... Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRPTwgM0qzEGK3x_um61fkWJhvy24qMOV1SHyGJCKgmi8X-87roEg

I read the Agnostic gospels and other works long before Dan Brown wrote the Da Vinci Code so you predilection towards ridicule in inept at best...

...Between that and your minuscule memory retention about my religious beliefs makes you even more pathetic.

*****SMILE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AA64eCt2zs

Smile

I don't know anything about the Da Vinci Code.

I was referring to the Last Temptation of Christ.

Damn good movie.

Idiot.

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:
Damaged Eagle wrote:
Sal wrote:Yeah!

Jebus was banging the shit out of that Mary Magdalene slut.

Hollywood done told me so.

I read the Agnostic gospels and other works long before Dan Brown wrote the Da Vinci Code so you predilection towards ridicule in inept at best...

...Between that and your minuscule memory retention about my religious beliefs makes you even more pathetic.

*****SMILE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AA64eCt2zs

Smile

I don't know anything about the Da Vinci Code.

I was referring to the Last Temptation of Christ.

Damn good movie.

Idiot.

Conflicting statements from God's marketing department.... Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTPeU2pB9m3gtLhgB3hazf9M9QO4AlwFURtB0orhUw-npj_qvSv

I've never watched The Last Temptation Of Christ but I'm sure for someone as anal retentive as you are it was.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuIkINDV0tg

Twisted Evil

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

The Gospel of Philip has been cited for the theory that Jesus married Mary Magdalene.[12] Much of the Gospel of Philip is dedicated to a discussion of marriage as a sacred mystery, and two passages directly refer to Mary Magdalene and her close relationship with Jesus:

There were three who always walked with the Lord: Mary, his mother, and her sister, and Magdalene, the one who was called his companion. His sister and his mother and his companion were each a Mary.

In different places in the Gospel of Philip, Mary Magdalene is called Jesus's companion, partner or consort, using Coptic variants of the word koinônos (κοινωνός),[13] of Greek origin, or the word hôtre, of Egyptian origin.[2] In this passage koinônos is used. Koinônos has a range of possible meanings: at root, it denotes a “person engaged in fellowship or sharing with someone or in something,” but what exactly a koinônos “can share with his or her partner can take many forms, ranging from a common enterprise or experience to a shared business.”[14] In the Bible, koinônos is sometimes used to refer to a spouse (Mal 2:14; cf. 3 Macc 4:6), but is also used to refer to a "companion" in faith (Phlm 17), a co-worker in proclaiming the Gospel (2 Cor 8:23), or a business associate (Luke 5:10).[14] The Gospel of Philip uses cognates of koinônos and Coptic equivalents to refer to the literal pairing of men and women in marriage and sexual intercourse, but also metaphorically, referring to a spiritual partnership, and the reunification of the Gnostic Christian with the divine realm.[14] And importantly, there are occasions in the Gospel of Philip when the regular Coptic word for wife is used directly in reference to people who are clearly spouses, suggesting that the term koinônos is “reserved for a more specific usage" in the Gospel of Philip.[14]

That passage is also interesting for its mention of Jesus's sister (Jesus's unnamed sisters are mentioned in the New Testament at Mark 6:3), although the text is confusing on that point: she appears to be described first as the sister of Jesus's mother Mary, then as the sister of Jesus, although this may be a translation problem.

The other passage, referring to Jesus kissing Mary Magdalene, is incomplete because of damage to the original manuscript. Several words are missing. The best guesses as to what they were are shown below in brackets. Most notably there is a hole in the manuscript after the phrase "and used to kiss her often on her...." But the passage appears to describe Jesus kissing Magdalene, apparently described as "barren" and "the mother of the angels" at the beginning of the relevant paragraph and using a parable to explain to the disciples why he loved her more than he loved them:

As for the Wisdom who is called 'the barren', she is the mother of the angels. And the companion of [the saviour was Mar]y Ma[gda]lene. [Christ loved] M[ary] more than [all] the disci[ples, and used to] kiss her [softly] on her [hand]. The rest of [the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval]. They said to him "Why do you love her more than all of us?" The Saviour answered and said to them, "Why do I not love you like her? When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. When the light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness.

However, "hand" is not necessarily the word after "kiss her... on her". It may have been cheek, forehead or feet to simply show respect.[15]

But the presentation of a 4th century papyrus fragment (probably copy of another one dating back to the 2nd century) called the Gospel of Jesus' wife at the International Congress of Coptic Studies in Rome on September 18, 2012 by Karen L. King may fuel the idea that early Christians believed that Jesus was married.[16][17]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Philip

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote:The Gospel of Philip has been cited for the theory that Jesus married Mary Magdalene.

Gospel of Philip?

Sounds like some homosexualist propaganda to me.

Philip is the gayest name EVAR.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Well Philip probably was queer so not a reliable witness.

But there is something in that text that is far more interesting than the question of whether jesus was sexually active.

Let's read it again...
____________________________
In different places in the Gospel of Philip, Mary Magdalene is called Jesus's companion, partner or consort, using Coptic variants of the word koinônos (κοινωνός),[13] of Greek origin, or the word hôtre, of Egyptian origin.[2] In this passage koinônos is used. Koinônos has a range of possible meanings: at root, it denotes a “person engaged in fellowship or sharing with someone or in something,” but what exactly a koinônos “can share with his or her partner can take many forms, ranging from a common enterprise or experience to a shared business.”[14] In the Bible, koinônos is sometimes used to refer to a spouse (Mal 2:14; cf. 3 Macc 4:6), but is also used to refer[/b] to a "companion" in faith (Phlm 17), a co-worker in proclaiming the Gospel (2 Cor 8:23), or a business associate (Luke 5:10).[14] The Gospel of Philip uses [b]cognates of koinônos and Coptic equivalents to refer to the literal pairing of men and women in marriage and sexual intercourse, but also metaphorically, referring to a spiritual partnership, and the reunification of the Gnostic Christian with the divine realm.[14] And importantly, there are occasions in the Gospel of Philip when the regular Coptic word for wife is used directly in reference to people who are clearly spouses, suggesting that the term koinônos is “reserved for a more specific usage" in the Gospel of Philip.[14]
___________________________
And what you see there is true of ALL the so-called "gospels". The language has now been translated and re-translated and interpreted and re-interpreted and is so ancient that it requires so much speculation and interpretation that in today's world any such thing would be considered worthless if it wasn't the Bible.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum