Greatest Quotes from fundamentalist christian chat rooms

shonky · Post by **shonky** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:32 pm

http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/latestcomm ... ?archive=1

Even more of the fuckers here

"Masturbation can sometimes be wrong and it can sometimes not. If you masturbate thinking about how pretty the flowers are and how you want a puppy, essentially that's not wrong. But most times, that is not the case. I believe that when one masturbates a high percentage of the time they are fantasizing about a sexual partner therefore making masturbation lust. Lust, as the Bible states, is a sin. But masturbation is something that people in general should stay away from because it's hard not to lust whilst doing it."

Erm...

"If u have sex before marriage then in Gods eyes u are married to that person if a man rapes a woman in Gods eyes they are married it sucks for the girl but what can we do lol"

Love the well-placed lol there

"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!"

Extra ****** on the last one I think

"A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However he should not penetrate, sodomising the child is OK. If the man penetrates and damages the child then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister."

Presumably from Alabama

"Everyone knows scientists insist on using complex terminology to make it harder for True Christians to refute their claims.

Deoxyribonucleic Acid, for example... sounds impressive, right? But have you ever seen what happens if you put something in acid? It dissolves! If we had all this acid in our cells, we'd all dissolve! So much for the Theory of Evolution, Check MATE!"

This is what happens when science gets sidelined by nonsense I guess

Pada · Post by **Pada** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:43 pm

"Make sure your answer uses Scripture, not logic."

makes sense.

drquynh · Post by **drquynh** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:39 pm

Shonky wrote:Some of them are run in a fashion that totalitarian regimes would be jealous of.

I see they take their cues from DSF?

or does the Bush/Blair coalition of the cornballs take theirs from them?

tempest · Post by **tempest** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:32 pm

Shonky wrote:http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/latestcomm ... ?archive=1

"A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However he should not penetrate, sodomising the child is OK. If the man penetrates and damages the child then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister."

Presumably from Alabama

I think that is actually a quote from a fundamentalist muslim

But fucking lol at christians and religion in general... Spose it's all harmless if you just follow a loose guideline of how to live your life morally correct. But man some people take this shit too far.

beans · Post by **beans** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:16 am

Shonky wrote:Deoxyribonucleic Acid, for example... sounds impressive, right? But have you ever seen what happens if you put something in acid? It dissolves! If we had all this acid in our cells, we'd all dissolve! So much for the Theory of Evolution, Check MATE!"

This is what happens when science gets sidelined by nonsense I guess

That man is a fucking genius, I mean it so obvious now, and his thoery is so foolproof

That 'check MATE' is especially hilarious

beans · Post by **beans** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:19 am

Ther are just so many fucked up quotes on that FSTDT top 100. Fundementalism on any matter usually just closes peoples mind to other ideas and theories and i usually find the most dangerous people are the willingly ignorant

flippo · Post by **flippo** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:31 am

Shonky wrote: Deoxyribonucleic Acid, for example... sounds impressive, right? But have you ever seen what happens if you put something in acid? It dissolves! If we had all this acid in our cells, we'd all dissolve! So much for the Theory of Evolution, Check MATE!"

LOL!

that cannot be real!!!! WHAT THE FUCK!?

deamonds · Post by **deamonds** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:13 am

pk- wrote:people with brains i suppose

damn them

metalboxproducts · Post by **metalboxproducts** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:16 am

dubluke wrote:http://christianforums.com/f370-fundame ... rches.html

sign up people - lets get on it

shonky, if we're chucked out, we're chucked out

i reckon it would actually be more interesting to go on there and post far more extreme views and see if anyone agrees, than to just go on there and raid

Think we should do this. lol

shonky · Post by **shonky** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:00 am

metalboxproducts wrote:
dubluke wrote:http://christianforums.com/f370-fundame ... rches.html

sign up people - lets get on it

shonky, if we're chucked out, we're chucked out

i reckon it would actually be more interesting to go on there and post far more extreme views and see if anyone agrees, than to just go on there and raid
Think we should do this. lol

We already have - http://www.dubstepforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=37136

Check about 10 pages in and join us in our mish

kidlogic · Post by **kidlogic** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:14 am

Those Christian fundimentalist quotes are a bit unnerving to me, to believe that there are people who honestly are that... far gone, for lack of a better way to put it, and that some of those people are running our govt and shaping children's lives. It boggles the mind and sometimes honestly makes me nauseous.

Taoism is a good one, not really a religion per se, but a good philosophy on life. When I was first reading about it it was like re-reading my own ideas about life, the universe and everything. The painting of "The Vinegar Tasters" sums it up well...

The Vinegar Tasters is an allegorical image representing Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism (Daoism), and generally favourable to Taoism and critical of the other two. It depicts three men dipping their fingers in a vat of vinegar and tasting it; one man reacts with a sour expression, one reacts with a bitter expression, and one reacts with a happy expression.

The three men are depictions of Confucius, Buddha, and Lao Tze, and represent the three major philosophical traditions of China — Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism. Each man's expression represents the predominant attitude of the religion: Confucianism saw life as sour, in need of rules to correct the degeneration of people; Buddhism saw life as bitter, dominated by pain and suffering; and Taoism saw life as fundamentally good in its natural state

chunkie · Post by **chunkie** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:24 am

kidlogic wrote:Buddhism saw life as bitter, dominated by pain and suffering

not strictly true per se

it seems that the illustration is the work of taoists, putting down the other two for its own power/finance based gain

i'd say religions putting down other religions is very much part of the problem

kidlogic · Post by **kidlogic** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:58 am

Chunkie wrote:
kidlogic wrote:Buddhism saw life as bitter, dominated by pain and suffering
not strictly true per se

it seems that the illustration is the work of taoists, putting down the other two for its own power/finance based gain

i'd say religions putting down other religions is very much part of the problem

Well, you are correct that is was a Taoist painting, but that discription is from answers.com or something and is a little short. Obviously Buddhism and Confuciunism, even Taoism for that matter cant be summed up in the few words that discription gives. Having studied Taoism and Buddhism a bit (not enough that I would claim expertise in either mind you) I doubt that it was made for Taoist gain though as Taoism was never as popular as either of the others depicted and didnt seem to strive to be. That idea somewhat goes against its principals, which are actually very "Dude-like" (as in Jefforey Lebowski). Just go with the flow, man.

pk- · Post by **pk-** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 12:36 pm

i think the ideas of an all seeing god is bollocks

especially the belief held by some that god controls everything - hypocrites..... god controls all and they pray for help here and there and believe on occasion god is helping them but then when someone they love dies (for example) its all sadness and woe. surely the person dying was also an act of god in which case you should rejoice in his inherent brilliance, do not question him, do not grieve, all is wonderful.

yeah, that's always baffled me. surely someone with deep religious convictions should be pretty nonplussed by the death of a loved one.

i was a catholic for 16 years - if you can count the ages of 0-8 - until i had a minor epiphany

the thing that i don't like about religion is the concept of judgement, because it makes even the most benevolent acts self-serving in the end. be charitable or you'll go to hell, be humble and you'll be rewarded...it's as if you're not doing it because you know it's the right thing to do, but rather because if you don't you'll be fucked by the biggest prick in the universe.

i do think there's something, because if you follow back scientific explanations for the universe far enough you get to a point that needs outside influence to kick start everything, but it's doubtful that it involves an afterlife full of happiness and joy. it's just wishful thinking really, isn't it.

chunkie · Post by **chunkie** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 12:46 pm

pk- wrote:
the thing that i don't like about religion is the concept of judgement, because it makes even the most benevolent acts self-serving in the end.

damn straight

i also dislike the tendency of religion to absolve people of responsibility - things being put down to god's will etc

chunkie · Post by **chunkie** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 1:00 pm

kidlogic wrote: I doubt that it was made for Taoist gain though as Taoism was never as popular as either of the others depicted and didnt seem to strive to be. That idea somewhat goes against its principals

i get your point but i'm far too much of a sceptic to entertain the thought that religions/belief systems and their advocates/priests/believers are not corrupted by greed

end of the day the market for religious art is huge and i fully expect people to exploit for self-gain (despite obvious jarring between the belief system and the commercial venture)

if i had the scruples i'd start a church/temple:

1) Start up costs = venue, couple of holy books + donations of religious art
2) Expenses = voluntary staff who think they are doing god's work (possibly a paid cleaner and assistant who works for peanuts, think old biddies with spare time a plenty)
3) Income = 1500 people/visits averaging a donation of £2 per week = £3k so £156k a year. Of which net profit is probably as much as £100k
4) Bear in mind the relatively short working hours and all the tax exemptions for religious institutions which are registered as charities, we are talking about a substantial wad in my back pocket

but i couldn't abuse people's trust like this (then i'd be as bad as 'real' priests)...... so back to the day job

shonky · Post by **shonky** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 1:15 pm

Chunkie wrote:
but i couldn't abuse people's trust like this (then i'd be as bad as 'real' priests)...... so back to the day job

You total pussy - wtf ethics????

chunkie · Post by **chunkie** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 1:26 pm

Shonky wrote:
Chunkie wrote:
but i couldn't abuse people's trust like this (then i'd be as bad as 'real' priests)...... so back to the day job
You total pussy - wtf ethics????

point noted

you got some cash stacked away and fancy a new venture??

watermelonman · Post by **watermelonman** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 1:50 pm

But without fundamentalist Christians, there'd be no comedy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qmglGWMsdk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHey5g56CIs

shonky · Post by **shonky** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:39 pm

Chunkie wrote:
Shonky wrote:
Chunkie wrote:
but i couldn't abuse people's trust like this (then i'd be as bad as 'real' priests)...... so back to the day job
You total pussy - wtf ethics????
point noted

you got some cash stacked away and fancy a new venture??

Gotta do my collections and then have a chat with some friends of ours.

Dis choich racket beats da fuck out of protection - who's gonna fuck with Gawd?

Greatest Quotes from fundamentalist christian chat rooms

Who is online