Has jmfcst ever swayed you with his Bible thumping?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I have to ask, since it seems rather pointless for him to spend all that time on that considering that no one seems to be persuaded, and I highly doubt people like opebo ever will be.

[Alcon]

No.  It repels me, and makes me less likely to agree with the things he says.  He is wasting his energy.

[MODU]

It doesn't bother me, but honestly I don't stop and read everything he says.  However, I tend not to read many of the very long discussion chains (since they are usually off-topic to begin with).

[Dr. Cynic]

It's Jmfcst's right to thump that bible until it breaks the podium. Personally, none of it will convert me to believe in it, but hey, whatever makes him happy.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I just wonder why he bothers with such long drawn out posts, since I have yet to see anyone persuaded by them. Then of course there's the people he's directed too.

Somehow I really doubt opebo is going to read jmfcst quoting the Bible, and then say "Wow, I now see you are right! I now renounce my atheism and shall become a fundamentalist Christian!"

[7,052,770]

only dumbs care, jmfcst


one of the greatest things ever said on this forum.

[MaC]

no, but you're not going to sway him not to biblethump with this thread (unfortunately)

What'd be even funnier if he posted something like

Ezekiel 5;39: Do not listen to red avatars, for the blue ones speak the truth
Numbers 3;33: Opebo will go to hell
Psalms 7;2: Everyone who posts on the electionatlas that doesn't agree with these quotes will die

[MODU]

I just wonder why he bothers with such long drawn out posts, since I have yet to see anyone persuaded by them. Then of course there's the people he's directed too.

That can be said about a lot of people we don't agree with.

[John Dibble]

A resounding 'no'. His interpretation of the Christian god repels me. Why would I worship a tyrant? All I have to do to be 'saved' is become a slave to god, right? But saved from what exactly? Seems to me the only thing I'd be 'saved' from is his god's own willful wrath. I mean wtf, you call that saved? That's like saying a schoolyard bully saved me from a beating because I gave him my lunch money on demand. No thank you, I prefer not to give into bullies and tyrants.

[minionofmidas]

No, but his knowledge has impressed me at times.
Which may be what he's mostly trying to do.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

He's swayed me into supporting mass pogroms against the evangelical sector of US society.

[Speed of Sound]

A resounding 'no'. His interpretation of the Christian god repels me. Why would I worship a tyrant? All I have to do to be 'saved' is become a slave to god, right? But saved from what exactly? Seems to me the only thing I'd be 'saved' from is his god's own willful wrath. I mean wtf, you call that saved? That's like saying a schoolyard bully saved me from a beating because I gave him my lunch money on demand. No thank you, I prefer not to give into bullies and tyrants.

Well said.

Ive seen ridiculous Chrisitans, (most of them ), jmfcst ranks up there among the most ridiculous. He hasnt swayed to do anything but dream of the day he finds out hes wrong.

[Bono]

A resounding 'no'. His interpretation of the Christian god repels me. Why would I worship a tyrant? All I have to do to be 'saved' is become a slave to god, right? But saved from what exactly? Seems to me the only thing I'd be 'saved' from is his god's own willful wrath. I mean wtf, you call that saved? That's like saying a schoolyard bully saved me from a beating because I gave him my lunch money on demand. No thank you, I prefer not to give into bullies and tyrants.

Would a tyrant send His own Son to die for the sins of His Church?

[John Dibble]

A resounding 'no'. His interpretation of the Christian god repels me. Why would I worship a tyrant? All I have to do to be 'saved' is become a slave to god, right? But saved from what exactly? Seems to me the only thing I'd be 'saved' from is his god's own willful wrath. I mean wtf, you call that saved? That's like saying a schoolyard bully saved me from a beating because I gave him my lunch money on demand. No thank you, I prefer not to give into bullies and tyrants.

Would a tyrant send His own Son to die for the sins of His Church?

To die? I thought he came back to life, and pretty much knew he would. Am I wrong about this? If that's the case I can hardly call that some grand sacrifice. Isn't your god omnipotent? Omnipotent means so powerful that he can do anything right? Why would he send his own son to be beaten, whipped, stabbed, and ultimately killed only to do something that as an omnipotent being he could simply do without such suffering? Sounds to me like he made some grand, symbolic gesture at the expense of his own son in order to gather more slaves if you ask me.

[MasterJedi]

No, but it's not like you've ever swayed me with your sh**t anyway.

[afleitch]

No. He has in fact hardened my opinions.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

No, but it's not like you've ever swayed me with your sh**t anyway.

Apples/oranges comparison.

The equivalent of me doing what he's doing would be making threads saying things like "Bad news for the MasterJedis and Dibbles, there will be a great Proletariat revolution that will abolish capitalism" and start giving quotes from Marx's writings as proof of this, somehow expecting that this will convert you guys.

[Bono]

A resounding 'no'. His interpretation of the Christian god repels me. Why would I worship a tyrant? All I have to do to be 'saved' is become a slave to god, right? But saved from what exactly? Seems to me the only thing I'd be 'saved' from is his god's own willful wrath. I mean wtf, you call that saved? That's like saying a schoolyard bully saved me from a beating because I gave him my lunch money on demand. No thank you, I prefer not to give into bullies and tyrants.

Would a tyrant send His own Son to die for the sins of His Church?

To die? I thought he came back to life, and pretty much knew he would. Am I wrong about this? If that's the case I can hardly call that some grand sacrifice. Isn't your god omnipotent? Omnipotent means so powerful that he can do anything right? Why would he send his own son to be beaten, whipped, stabbed, and ultimately killed only to do something that as an omnipotent being he could simply do without such suffering? Sounds to me like he made some grand, symbolic gesture at the expense of his own son in order to gather more slaves if you ask me.

Yes, He came back to life. That doesn't mean He didn't die.
And He suffered too.
YOu are forgetting that the Son is God too, with the Holy Spirit. And as to why the sacrifice happened--you are obviously ignorant of scripture. For Israel, there had to be made yearly sacrifices for the remission of sins--these were a shadow of the future total remission, the ultimate sacrifice, which was Christ's. He is the Lamb of God who made future sacrifices unnecessary.
God is not obliged to save anyone. He had a covenant of works with Adam. Adam failed that covenant, and after the fall, every dealings with mankind were to be by Grace alone.

[John Dibble]

A resounding 'no'. His interpretation of the Christian god repels me. Why would I worship a tyrant? All I have to do to be 'saved' is become a slave to god, right? But saved from what exactly? Seems to me the only thing I'd be 'saved' from is his god's own willful wrath. I mean wtf, you call that saved? That's like saying a schoolyard bully saved me from a beating because I gave him my lunch money on demand. No thank you, I prefer not to give into bullies and tyrants.

Would a tyrant send His own Son to die for the sins of His Church?

To die? I thought he came back to life, and pretty much knew he would. Am I wrong about this? If that's the case I can hardly call that some grand sacrifice. Isn't your god omnipotent? Omnipotent means so powerful that he can do anything right? Why would he send his own son to be beaten, whipped, stabbed, and ultimately killed only to do something that as an omnipotent being he could simply do without such suffering? Sounds to me like he made some grand, symbolic gesture at the expense of his own son in order to gather more slaves if you ask me.

Yes, He came back to life. That doesn't mean He didn't die.
And He suffered too.
YOu are forgetting that the Son is God too, with the Holy Spirit. And as to why the sacrifice happened--you are obviously ignorant of scripture. For Israel, there had to be made yearly sacrifices for the remission of sins--these were a shadow of the future total remission, the ultimate sacrifice, which was Christ's. He is the Lamb of God who made future sacrifices unnecessary.
God is not obliged to save anyone. He had a covenant of works with Adam. Adam failed that covenant, and after the fall, every dealings with mankind were to be by Grace alone.

Hey, you're the one who said god sent down his son, making him sound as a seperate being, not me. Ok then, he came down himself, had some suffering(which as I stated was unnecessary outside of mere symbolism since god is omnipotent and could skip right past that part).

As far as god not being obliged to save anyone, I never said he was. But is he obliged to inflict eternal suffering on those who don't become his slaves? He'll give eternal paradise to a mass murderer who raped the eye sockets of his victims before slitting their throats if he converts at the last minute before he has the needle stuck in his arms, but a Hindu who spends his life helping the downtrodden, feeding the hungry, healing the sick, and stuff like that will suffer eternally at your god's will because the particular invisible man in the sky he worships has six arms? I don't know what standards you go by, but anyone who demands you be their slave or they'll torture you sounds like a tyrant to me.

[Citizen James]

Must. avoid. temptation. to. remove.  t. from. question.

Seriously though, he is a shining example of how difficult (yet nessisary) it is to tollerate viewpoints which are well outside the mainstream as well as totally devoid of reason or even internal logic.

Along with the more difficult question of what to do when the millitantly irrational gain a portion of power (such as Iranian radicals, or even nationless but violent orginizations such as Al Queda).  It can be quite a conundrum when a person's belief systems consider themselves above the laws of man.  And yet statments and actions are very different, and we cannot, and should not, imprison those who merely have repugnant beliefs and statements unless they couple those with actions which are directly damaging to others.

[Joe Republic]

Yes he has.  He's certainly swayed me against his arguments, given that his superiority complex and impervious skull make him one of the most repellant people on here.  If he could only form his arguments without referring to or directly quoting the Bible, he might start to become slightly more reasonable.

[jerusalemcar5]

Hardened my beliefs that there must be a global effort to eradicate fundamentalism in religions.   The only thing more dangerous than religion, is theocracy.

[© tweed]

Not really.  Sometimes he's made me scared that I'm going to hell, but that ended about a year ago and I don't worry anymore.

[Bono]

Hardened my beliefs that there must be a global effort to eradicate fundamentalism in religions.   The only thing more dangerous than religion, is theocracy.

Good to see that you hate freedom.

[NewFederalist]

He is a great poster who defends his beliefs very well. He is consistent and given the level of crappola that he endures from most folks here I admire his persistence. Having said all that I cannot say he has ever "swayed" me with quotes from scripture. I believe we hold different beliefs but I respect his.