http://duggmirror.com/comedy/100_Greatest_Quotes_from_fundamentalist_christian_chat_rooms/

This was posted on another forum I frequent.

Pretty funny stuff. Especially the anti-evolution tirades.

I'd like to see other religion's top 100 chatroom quotes too. It would be interesting to compare and contrast the outrageousness.

WOW.

I love the fact that alot of these morons honestly think that English is the only language their "god" can understand.

"If your original Hebrew disagrees with my original King James --- your original Hebrew is wrong. If your original Hebrew agrees with my original King James, your original Hebrew is right. "

and

"The word of God has been in heaven forever. The KJV has always been there. The so called Hebrew words like Alleluia are English words. The English did not borrow them from the Hebrew but rather the Hebrew borrowed them from the English. If the KJV has always been there and is the original word of God then there is no other conclusion. The same can be said for any so called Greek words that were borrowed from the Greek or transliterated. It is a matter of what bias you approach this particular subject. "

I had no idea that the omnipotent creator of the universe doesn't know the words to Frere Jaques (Ding, Dang, Dong).

I can't stop laughing over this one:

"I am a bit troubled. I believe my son has a girlfriend, because she left a dirty magazine with men in it under his bed. My son is only 16 and I really don't think he's ready to date yet. What's worse is that he's sneaking some girl to his room behind my back. I need help, God! I want my son to stop being so secretive!"

Too funny, man, too funny.

Wow. What a diluded woman. My question is, where's daddy?

Scary part is, this contingent is primarily responsible for staffing our federal government for the last decade.

I'll put money on it that this guy thinks a plane on a treadmill couldn't fly.

They tried to complile one, but they kept getting blown up. They decided to stick with just Christians to pick on for fear of their own lives.

Surely some of those can't be real.

I mean, yeah...there are some kooky fundies...but some of those are too over the top.

I like these:

This just seems to sum up why zealots are so messed up.

Sad but true.

Did anyone picture Ned Flanders saying this?

There are reasons the bible uses sheep as a metaphor. Somebody needs to point out to these freaks that the Rapture is not a retirement plan.

I'll just one thing, and leave it at that. I am a Christian. I have been for 17 years now. I am very actively invloved in my church, and I have actually been a paid staff person at a couple churches. I consider myself very knowledgeable of "Christian culture" and the nature of the church. Having said that, I can say without hesitation or doubt, these people you're talking about in here are not in any way representative of the thoughts, mentalities, or ideologies of mainstream Christianity. These people are extreme right-wing nut-jobs. In any people group there are weirdos. These are the weirdos among Christians. Unfortunately, it's often the weirdos who speak the loudest, or at least make the biggest scene.

Please don't think we're all like these people. I may say things some of you disagree with, but I'm not an illogical person who denies the existence of gravity or the laws of nature. That's insanity. And I think you'll find that if you actually talk to some of us instead of referring to wacko online forums for reference material, you'll find that what I am saying is true. We're normal human beings.

Prior to becoming a follower of Jesus Christ, I was nothing really. No religious affiliation. Honestly, I openly mocked what I called "Bible-thumpers" back then. And I still have a distaste for them. People who are so dogmatic in their faith that they can't see anything but their own perspective and don't really care what another has to say unless its "Hallelujah".

When I was born, my single mom was invloved in one of those holy-roller, screamin' and dancin' churches. It meant nothing to me as a kid. I didn't become a Christian until right after high school.

My wife and I are part of a "non-denominational" church. That's what I like. I feel that denoms are man-made and only serve to divide people. I would say that yes, the congregation I'm a part of is "mainstream". It's very active in the community, it's missions-minded, it's multi-cultural, it's compassionate, it's excited about seeing the church as a whole work together instead of apart and I feel that we work hard toward that end. We have gays and drug addicts and criminals in our congregation. And they are loved. And people's hearts are being healed. And all we're doing is trying to do what God says to do.

Dude... I'm a Christian and I LOVE my jeans. Are you telling me that I'm divided because of my man-made Levi's? Wait... Levi was a biblical character; you're saying he wore denom?

You lost me. :p

You're being somewhat evasive of the questions I asked. The reason I asked is because you seem to be bringing up the fact that you are a Christian in a number of threads and I was curious.

A non-denominational church is not what can be considered mainstream Christian.

You said you considered yourself very knowledgeable of "Christian culture" and the nature of the church. Well, what church?

You once either said or implied that you were a "born-again" Christian. If that is the case, I am fairly sure that I am not alone in claiming that born-again Christians and evangelicals are not mainstream Christians.

Hen's love Roosters, Geese love Ganders,
Everybody love Ned Flanders! Not Night in Armor!
Everybody who counts loves Ned Flanders.
Thanks for the huge laugh. Remember the episode where Lisa's president and Rod and Todd are furnature restorers? LOL

Sorry, I definitely am not trying to be evasive. One of my hopes in life is simply to help people who don't subscribe to my beliefs at least understand the truth of them, so they can at least make a decision on the Christian faith based on the truth, rather than some warped representation of it given by one of these foil-hat wearin' nut-jobs or by someone who just plain old hates Christians and isn't giving it a fair representation because of their emotions.

I think I am making the mistake of using what is sometimes called "Christianese" language. When I use the term "the church" I'm referring to the whole shebang. Christ didn't differentiate, so I try not to. All Christian denominations, including Catholic. When I use the term "mainstream" I'm referring to congregations and denominations that are neither uber-wacko-conservative nor uber-wacko-liberal. And believe me, there are plenty of both. My intent in using that term is to indicate congregations that, generally speaking, communicate and act within the parameters of what most of those congregations perceive as Godly.

To address your comment that "born-again Christians and evangelicals are not mainstream Christians," I guess I would have to ask you to define your understanding of those terms. To me, those are synonyms. I will admit though, that to the non-church crowd, those words have negative connotations. As does "Christian". Am I answering your questions? If not, let me know how I can better.

The definition of "Christian" varies GREATLY in this country, and even more so around the world. I think of a Christian as a follower of Jesus Christ. Whether you find comfort in your relationship with Him in your heart through the pastor of a Methodist Church, a Small Group of fellow Christians in your home, a Baptist Church, or a Church with no specific affiliation to any denomination in particular, it is my belief that you're still a "Christian" by the strictest biblical definition.

Now, I consider myself a "born again" Christian because i made a conscience choice to leave my old lifestyle behind. I'm not the most Zealous Christian in the world, I don't condemn the actions of others, I don't go door to door telling people they're going to hell, etc. I am offended by people like Jim Baker, Jimmy Swaggert, and Oral Roberts who swear they'll die if they don't receive a million dollars worth of donations. I am offended by political leaders who, in the name of Christianity, call out sects of people and proclaim they're "not worthy" of something, etc.

Such self-righteous people may or may not be "Christians" in the true sense of the word as I believe it.

Some people think a Christian is a "white person." Seriously. Some people think its any person who believes in God. Some think its a "Church Goer." Lately i hear the phrase "Christians of the Radical Religious Right" and it makes me cringe. It permeates the notion that anyone who professes faith in Jesus Christ is a "Radical" person who might shoot a doctor in an abortion clinic or something. Nothing is further from the truth.

The born-agains and many so-called evangelicals are the ones that focus a lot on their conversions. I remember as a kid in the 70's a lot of them would put "I Found It" bumper stickers on their cars. If their conversions make them happy, so be it and more power to them. It's none of my business and to each his own.

The problem with many born-agains and evangelicals is their activism and their arrogance regarding their interpretations of the bible as being the only religious authority.

Many are hostile to, and thumb their noses at mainstream Christians such as Catholics or more mainstream Protestant denominations. There is without a doubt a level of arrogance with many born-agains. I suspect much is derived because of their so-called conversion experiences and the fact that they "found it". Most mainstream Chrisitans never "lost it" and rarely hold hostile or arrogant views towards other flavors of Christianity.

I agree with your statement that many evangelicals can be found on extremes of left and right. There is most definitely a rise of the "religious left" and some of it is even coming from mainstream Christians such as Catholics.

I personally am not hostile to Christians or the term Christian. I more often than not defend them against much of the baseless and unwarranted attacks thrown in their direction. However, there are certain times when some of that criticism can be warranted.

I myself am a Catholic, but I am not what can be considered a particularly religious person.

My problem with born-agains and evangelicals is the arrogance of which they seem to claim the mantle of some type of true Christians or true form of Christianity. Some other things too, but I'll leave it at that.

Let me preface this by saying we have hijacked this thread bigtime.

But I would definitely agree with you there. And I'm guilty of that. There is arrogance in the Christian church, and it's not just coming from the Protestants. Just a few months ago, Pope Benedict proclaimed officially and globally that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church, and any other church is either not a true church or a misguided church. That deeply offended me and honestly, it disgusted me and totally highlighted for me one of the biggest flaws in the church (all denominations): pride. We are prideful people. And that is exactly what keep the church from becoming what it was designed by God to be. If we were humble as God desires us to be, the world would look very different. And the world would have a very different opinion of the church than it currently does.

The church needs to remember that we are all sinful (evil) by nature. All of us. And the only good that can be found in Christians is the presence of Christ in our lives. I know that's true in me.

Madman, I understand what you're saying. I don't believe that attending a Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, etc, church all of your life makes you a "Christian" any more than having season tickets makes you a ball-player. I believe those are "Mainstream Churchgoers" and not necessarily "Mainstream Christians."

It is my opinion that becoming a Christian is a very personal decision that's between you and Jesus Christ. Its not up to a preacher, priest, or evangelist to pronounce, confirm, or baptize you into Christianity.

Moreover, I believe what makes a Church a "Christian" church is its foundation in biblical truth (vs. the book of Mormon, or any book by L. Ron Hubbard, etc).

I just know that 1/2 the people on this board think I'm a "kook" now.

Agreed and well said.

There you go again with that bullshit of claiming mankind is evil by nature. Arrogance.

I'm starting to think you are a Pentecostal.

1. How can it possibly be considered arrogant for me to point the "evil" finger at myself?
2. If you are so certain that we're not evil by nature, show me in the Bible where it says otherwise.

I know you don't like people to use Bible quotes, but dude, to ask a Christian to explain the Christianity without using anything from the Bible...that's just impossible. You can't ask the NFL to start using the NBA's rules. The NFL's rules are the skeleton on which the gaming structure is built. Take that away and it simply doesn't function.

I disagree with some of what you said.

Catholics and other "church goers" that you refer to ARE Christians. Few people who don't believe in Jesus waste their time just attending church. I'm sure all faiths have a certain number of "church goers" as you claim, that go just to be seen by others.

I consider myself a Christian. I don't feel I have to go to church either.

Am I starting to unearth some of the aforementioned arrogance regarding born-again Christians and some evangelicals?

Biblical truth is also a debatable subject. Many seem to have their own versions of the bible and everyone claims theirs is the "true version".

Madman you keep using the word "arrogance". Why is it that a Christian holding an opinion and attesting that it is correct amounts to arrogance, but you making proclamations about what does and does not constitute a Christian is not arrogance but fact that we all must swallow as truth? Sounds like arrogance to me.

Also, since this thread has taken this turn, you need to define for the crowd here what your definition of a Christian is. Then you need to tell us all how you came to that definition.

It doesn't state in the bible that the inherent nature of man is evil. That is your interpretation of the bible.

God gave mankind volition and free will.

To state that the inherent nature of man is evil is almost tantamount to saying that mankind are the children of Satan before submitting to God and Christ.

I find that a bit of a troubling interpretation of the bible.

I'm going to annoy you with Bible quotes.

Jeremiah 17:9
"The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?

Genesis 8:21
The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: "Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done.

2 Timothy 2:22
Flee the evil desires of youth, and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

Shall I continue?

Yes... continue. Nothing stated says the inherent nature of mankind is evil. You Pentecostals or Evangelicals seem to ignore the volition and free will God gave to mankind.

You also ignore other versions of Christianity like Catholicism that believe Jesus reconciled original sin with his death and resurrection.

Catholics and some other Christians do not believe that mankind is inherently evil.

We should start thinking for ourselves instead of worrying about the directives of some mythical being.

If you want to worship anything. Worship nature. It's real, it's tangible, it has an actual cause and effect. It's the proven creator of all things. It can be harsh or beneficial, and it cares not where you are from, what name you give it, or what color your skin is. It cares not if you worship it or not, and you are not evil or good in it's eyes, because you worship it or don't. You just are. EVERTHING lives under it's rule and those facts cannot be argued. Nature will birth you and take your life long before any god will ever touch you. If god is anything, he/she is a child of nature just like us. I doubt nature cares much about him/her either.

Just my opinion though....

Here is an idea for a solution to this whole thing.

History of the World Part II

-Doug

Oh wow. How the heck do the words "every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood" not imply that man is inherently evil? In no way am I ignoring volition / free will. Man is living in sin because of his volition / free will. God gave us that free will. He can take it away at any time. We humans have chosen to live separated from him. God loves mankind enough to let us have our desired distance, no matter how much it hurts him.

Jesus reconciled man to God through His death and resurrection. Man's sin had separated him from God. Jesus' death and resurrection bridged the gap we created. Jesus became sin, taking our place. All we have to do is accept it (believe it) and the grace provided us through Jesus' death and resurrection.

On a tangent... Madman, you sound like you've thought a lot about this. Why?

Heresy!!! Seriously though, that's the problem, not the solution. That's why people hate Christians.

The words "every inclination" is not the same as "inherent" and does not have the same meaning. Inclination is a tendency. Inherent is a built in characteristic.

I think you may be under the impression that all versions of Christianity believe the same canon or even read the same versions of the bible. They do not. The texts itself may even be slightly different.

Your version of Christianity has different interpretations of many things than Roman Catholics. Modern Catholics also do not take a literal interpretation of the bible. Especially much of the Old Testament.

Modern Catholics and many Protestants hold a somewhat skeptical view. People who are Evangelical or Pentecostal Christians hold more literal interpretations of the bible. Your interpretation of the nature of mankind is not only different than say Catholics, but also literal within that interpretation.

As I said before, Catholics do not believe that mankind is inherently evil. I also think many Protestants also do not believe in such an interpretation.

Your version and particular interpretation of the nature of mankind is not held by the majority of Christians in the world.

And , no... I have not thought about these types of things very much. The only time I ever have to think about such things is in discussions with evangelical or fundamentalist type Christians. They are usually the people who claim theirs is the only true version of Christianity and they are the only true Christians.

To your credit, you have refrained from making such claims, but many Evangelicals, Pentacostals, or whatever, do make such claims. That could also be one of the reasons they are not held in high regard by many among the populace, even other Christians.

1. I understand the the word "inclination" is not a synonym for "inherent". But I also know that the word "every" appears before that word. Not "most" or "the majority" or "99%". Every means, all. The totality of. Every single tendendcy of the heart is toward evil. All of them.

2. In no way am I "under the impression that all versions of Christianity believe the same canon or even read the same versions of the bible." That's absurd. On the contrary, I'm very well aware of the doctrinal differences between Catholic and Protestant, as well as between many different Protestant denominations. I'm also aware that there are literally thousands of different translations of the Bible, some with books that aren't contained within the canon of mainline Protestant Bibles.

3. I'm also very well aware that some groups that call themselves "Christian" profess to not take the Bible literally. To me that is completely ludicrous. Why read it at all then? Why not read Stephen King novels or porn or something? If it's not to be taken literally, then there's no freaking point to any of it. If only some of it is to be taken literally, then what parts? And who decides? The priests? How do we know they have it right? Why the elitism? And if it's not to be taken literally, than anyone who claims to be a Christian is completely wasting their time. The credibility of the Bible rests on its veracity. If any part of it is proven false, it all must be thrown out.

4. You said this: "Your version and particular interpretation of the nature of mankind is not held by the majority of Christians in the world." How do you know this? Where's your proof? If I'm a protestant, talking with protestants, and you're a catholic talking with catholics, of course we're going to find people who support our views. Tell me where this information is coming from.

I disagree, Madman. Inherent in Catholic dogma, (yes even following Vatican II) is the belief of original sin. Therefore, man is inherently evil.

Who's a Christian?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations

Pagan.

Meh. THIS GUY is a christian too. He's got a half sleeve tattoo of Jesus carrying the cross saying "his pain, your gain", and constantly preaches to his employees about the grace of G-D, and how living according to the bible is the only way to heaven. Guy's a coke snortin', whiskey drinking, cheating on his wife w/ some skeezy employee girl kind of follower of Jesus. I guess it takes all kinds.. :rolleyes:

It does take all kinds. I'm no coke snorter or whiskey drinker, and I don't sleep around, but I have tattoos and I like me some good beer. The question I have is, is this guy still skankin' around and snorting coke. I honestly don't believe that God has an issue with alcohol. I think He has a problem with misuse and addiction. As for adultery... it's the only justification given in Scripture for divorce.

Number one, who ever translated this portion did a bad job, or else God wasn't talking about the desert. Maybe it's cursed for a reason other than man, which I suppose is understandable, but hardly the fault of anyone else, as no other creature is credited with having free will.

With regard to a literal interpretation of the bible vs. a parable interpretation, I tend to lean toward the parable side. Makes sense. Jesus taught in parables. You can't take the knowledge of the ancients and assume it is the same as today. Take Jonah. The only body of water near Ninevah is the Tigris river. The Tigris flows south to the Arabian gulf (I'm in Iraq, so I refer to it by the local name). It is so far in land that there is no way a whale could swim up the river to deposit a man there. Seen it with my own eyes. Not going to work, unless the flood was going on at the same time. Here's another one - what about the incestuous relationship with Cain and Abel? Both had wives, correct? Let's skip ahead to the post flood. Now we have three couples creating the entire population of the earth? I'm not about to do the math on the number of people who have ever existed vs. the chance of a genetic mutation, but it seems to me that the human species would have died out a long time ago if it descended from 3 pairs. Consider this: how good is your memory? Ever play the game "telephone"? It's hard to get a simple sentence correct when passed around a room. There was no written language back then. Is it not possible that somewhere along the line the story was embellished a bit, perhaps in order to teach a lesson? Was the world so much worse back then than it is today, and that's the reason God isn't inflicting big time punishments on people? When was the last person turned into a pillar of salt for not following God's rules? Seems to me that there's a lot of people not following God's rules and they seem to be doing just fine. Bottom line, it's a historical account to a degree, but mostly it's a work of fiction, just like the tales of other primitive people. Still goes on today. I have people telling me that there are sharks in the canal. I suppose it is possible, but highly doubtful.

You are wrong.

The concept of original sin doesn't mean that man is inherently evil.

In Catholicism it means mankind is weakened. I've explained that already. Catholics DO NOT believe the inherent nature of man is evil. Some Protestants do and obviously some of these Protestant Evangelicals believe that.

Most Catholic dogma comes from Catechism and not the bible.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

How do Catholics define concupiscence?....

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

Oh man. This is getting deep. Okay dude, here we go...

1. "Whoever quoted that" was a bunch of highly trained, highly educated theologians and linguists who had exhaustive access to some of the original documents and earliest manuscripts in existence. What's your basis of knowledge?

2. You're making gigantic assumptions all over the place.
A. Jesus spoke in parables, yes. But not exclusively and not even in a majority. Only in moments when He had something to teach that required more explanation.
B. Jonah wasn't in Nineveh from the start. He was sent there and he ran away, thinking he could hide from God. Here's the text:

Jonah 1
The word of the LORD came to Jonah son of Amittai: 2 "Go to the great city of Nineveh and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me."
3 But Jonah ran away from the LORD and headed for Tarshish. He went down to Joppa, where he found a ship bound for that port. After paying the fare, he went aboard and sailed for Tarshish to flee from the LORD.

3. Cain and Abel...I dont claim to have an answer to that. The Bible doesn't provide one as far as I can see, so my best guess is, God provided them wives somehow. Did He create them from dust like Adam and Eve or were they their sisters? Your guess is as good as mine.

4. The imperfect nature of man (short memory, mortality, disease, having to work for food) is a result of sin. Read the account of Adam and Eve.

5. The reason God isn't "inflicting big time punishments on people" can be summed up in one word: Jesus. Prior to the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ, the sins of man had to be atoned for by sacrificing animals and burning them. Their spilled blood was the price for our sins. God allowed us that out. But when the sins of man continued, God's love for man (His creations) drove Him to make a sacrifice on our behalf. His Son, Jesus, became the ultimate sacrifice. His spilled blood atones for the sins of all men. All we have to do to receive that atonement and forgiveness from God is believe it with our hearts and confess it with our lips.

I love her. She rocks.

http://i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=27103

That's at least one vote for Mike Huckabee right there.

God save me from your followers!

Hey, woah, let's keep Stephen King and porn out of this, they haven't done anything to anybody....