What's new

Pope to Athiests; House party in heaven. You're invited

As long as we're making senseless comparisons I just thought I'd mention that I'm a much better skier than the pope. Makes me proud. Pretty sure that Fish is a better drinker than the pope. Woohoo!!! Eenie Meenie might be better at stalking people, though I'm not sure about that. Thriller is way better at freaking out over conservative ideas. Siro is legit smarter than the pope, especially when it comes to stuff that is provable. Dal is better at putting on skinny jeans. We are pretty much cumulatively better than the pope at nearly everything except for riding around in the pope-mobile and doing other stuff associated with actually being a pope.

I thought you'd rep your talents for motivational speaking -- especially with respect to economic truths and how they wow @ Life. Or maybe the Pope is just better at that than you?
 
I'm going to enjoy watching you blow your top when we are in heaven.

You seem too sure of yourself. He said atheists can go to heaven, not Mormons!

Wait, are you even Mormon?
 
You seem too sure of yourself. He said atheists can go to heaven, not Mormons!

Wait, are you even Mormon?

Raised, even a return missionary, but certainly not practicing. I do not attend any church services or observe any religions tenets.
 
Frankly, this is nothing new! At the Vatican Council of 1869-70 the Roman Catholic cult sought to strengthen its organization for the immediate future by declaring its autocratic head, the pope, infallible. The leading Protestant religious organizations became spiritually unprogressive in their ways. Their clergy sought to consolidate their power over the laity. This clerical assumption of greater authority over their flocks meant a backward step from freedom of Christian thought and worship on the part of the masses of professed Christians. Infidelity, higher criticism, evolution, spiritism, atheism and communism began to invade and decimate the great world religious organizations Many of the evangelical churches began to “modernize” their false religious doctrines, not according to restored Bible truths, but according to theories of higher criticism and evolution. The paganized modernist form of theology inundated the churches.

ON April 26, 1882, the funeral of Charles Darwin was held in Westminster Abbey, London. A church may seem to some to have been the most inappropriate place to bury the man accused of ‘dethroning God’ with his evolutionary theory of natural selection. Yet, Darwin’s tomb has been there for more than a century.

Fact is, a leading cause of atheism is religion. Historian Alister McGrath explains: “What propels people toward atheism is above all a sense of revulsion against the excesses and failures of organized religion.” Religion is often seen as a factor behind wars and violence. An atheist and philosopher named Michel Onfray muses on how it is possible that the same religious book could inspire two types of men, one “aspiring to saintliness,” the other “carrying out an act of inhuman cruelty”—terrorism.
 
You're right you didn't. But your post implies that in matters of the bible you think you are.

Ummm...no. I pointed out that the Pope disagrees with what the Bible says, and made a little quip about how he doesn't believe in the Bible either. Anybody who has read the Bible could say the exact same thing I did, has nothing to do with intelligence.
 
Ummm...no. I pointed out that the Pope disagrees with what the Bible says, and made a little quip about how he doesn't believe in the Bible either. Anybody who has read the Bible could say the exact same thing I did, has nothing to do with intelligence.

You have others telling you that is how your post comes off. You don't want to believe that fine. It is still how it reads to some people.

Just pointing that out. Not picking an argument.
 
You have others telling you that is how your post comes off. You don't want to believe that fine. It is still how it reads to some people.

Just pointing that out. Not picking an argument.

Other. One person, unless you're including yourself.

It was just a little joke that you took seriously for some reason. That's all.
 
Other. One person, unless you're including yourself.

It was just a little joke that you took seriously for some reason. That's all.

I'll believe it's a joke. That's reasonable. But you taken that tone in a serious convo about religion before.

This isn't a stretch. It's also a dumb convo lol. So I'm out of it.
 
My comment about being smarter than the Pope was tongue in cheek.

TBH, I didn't think anyone read my posts.


Sent from the JazzFanz app
 
You have others telling you that is how your post comes off. You don't want to believe that fine. It is still how it reads to some people.

Just pointing that out. Not picking an argument.

I'll believe it's a joke. That's reasonable. But you taken that tone in a serious convo about religion before.

This isn't a stretch. It's also a dumb convo lol. So I'm out of it.

A HUGE thank you from everybody to stoked for telling us how dumb are conversations are.
 
Our: belonging to or associated with the speaker and one or more other people previously mentioned or easily identified.

Are:
2nd person singular present and 1st, 2nd, 3rd person plural present of be.

You're welcome Boris.
 
Back
Top