57
   

Why do you suppose Jesus never condemned slavery?

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 02:45 am
@spendius,
Quote:
spendius wrote:

Quote:
The young women of today are just fine, Spendius. Try not to let them scare you.


They don't. I keep out of their way.


Well earlier you said they scared you. You said they scared you very much. Are we supposed to accept what you said a few days ago...or what you are saying here in today's version of your truth?




Quote:
I once bought a property as an investment and I didn't know what to do with it in the meantime. I could have left it empty but one night in the pub I got talking to a local government chap and the subject came up. He said that if I converted it into six flats he could find me tenants whose rents his department would be paying. It sounded a good deal so I converted the joint into six flats. His job was to help wrung out men back to normality.

What a pitiful sight I was confronted with. One of them told me that he wished they had cut his dick off in infancy and another one asked me to knock him out if I saw him talking to a woman in a pub. When I finally decided I couldn't stand it any longer I closed it down. I had to go round once a week to shift the mail that came through the door. They were being hunted down like dogs.


Sure you did...and they did. Keep digging, Spendius. You are not deep enough yet.


Quote:

What the girls--oops--ladies, of A2K think about Apisa claiming they are harmless and are only panting with anticipation for him get it up them I cannot imagine. If I was them I would be enraged at such an underestimation of their powers of persuasion.


At no point have I ever suggested anything of the sort...nothing even like it. This is part of your delusional world, Spendius.



Quote:
Assertions notwithstanding.

My mother did try to drum into me that I was wonderful. It soon became obvious to me that she was just talking up her genetic material. Obviously you must have lapped it up and have never had cause to doubt.

What a big-headed, egotistical novice misogynist you are underneath that bluff exterior.


My, my...I guess the only way a big-headed, egotistical novice misogynist like you can deal with all that nonsense swimming round in your head...is to call someone else those names.

I am not a mysogynist in any way. Women are women. I enjoy interacting with them...and I do not demean them the way you do constantly.

Grow up, Spendius. And you really should not keep starting these discussions. You are not very good at them...and just keep digging yourself into a hole. Wink
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 02:47 am
@Moment-in-Time,
Moment-in-Time wrote:

Quote:
Why do you suppose Jesus didn't condemned slavery?

Why do you suppose he never spoke out against it?


I believe, Frank Apisa, that slavery was very much endemic to the culture. Some men, if they could afford it, had more than one wife. ["Render unto Caesar" is the beginning of a phrase attributed to Jesus in the synoptic gospels, which reads in full, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's" ] If Jesus did exist, why would he question Caesar's law which would have brought the Roman soldiers down upon him and his followers....

Caesar owned many a slave, along with many wealthy men of the day and these slaves accepted this as their status in life, such was the classification system during the time of Jesus.

I would be curious to know your personal thoughts on **your**question, for surely you must have some view.


Read the thread, MIT. I have answered that question many, many times.

Jesus (or the men who perhaps invented him) thought there was nothing wrong with slavery, because the god of the Torah told them there was nothing wrong with it. Condemning slavery would have been condemning the god.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 04:41 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
I am not a mysogynist in any way. Women are women. I enjoy interacting with them...and I do not demean them the way you do constantly.


Your use of "demean" is solid proof of your misogyny. I don't demean women. I simply state what they are like in general. For you to say that what they are like is a fault, as you do with "demean", cannot mean anything else but that you think there is something wrong with them as they have evolved. They are evolved to be gold-diggers in the interest of the species. Any body saying they are gold-diggers is complimenting them on being true to type and any body saying that the statement is "demeaning" obviously wants them to be not true to type because such a type is faulty. That's misogyny.

I like women as they are. I find them fascinating and a challenge and have no wish to change their evolved nature. To say that a factual representation of female nature is "demeaning" blows you out of the water. Show me where I have misrepresented them.

From your revelation of your assets we might assume your lode has never been prospected. Those of us with a lode worth prospecting have been worked on with a ruthless determination. In fact we make considerable efforts to wear the insignia of the value of our lodes for no other reason than to encourage us being worked on in that manner. Or at least until we are old enough to know better.

One only need look at the WAGS of highly paid sportsmen and the second wives (sic) or mistresses of men who got married before they made it.

Quote:
It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife.


Jane Austen.

Outside of the Bible that is probably the most well known sentence in western literature. And in Mansfield Park Admiral Crawford is made to say that a man with a good fortune who allows himself to be caught has taken leave of his senses.

spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 04:43 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
I enjoy interacting with them


Sure you do so long as they behave in a manner you approve of.
reasoning logic
 
  0  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 11:18 am
@spendius,

Quote:
I enjoy interacting with them



Sure you do so long as they behave in a manner you approve of.


Would you prefer that they behaved in a matter that you do not approve of spendius? Is it then you enjoy interacting with them?

When was the last time you went to a skeptic bible study?

spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 11:29 am
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
Would you prefer that they behaved in a matter that you do not approve of spendius?


I have no view. They are what they are. Like the weather. One navigates as best one can and blaming anybody else for any disasters is unmanly.

Getting them in a cage, gilded or otherwise, is like going big-game hunting in a zoo. I'm a Rider Haggard fan. I do my hunting in the wild. Or did I should say. I can't run as fast as I could.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 11:40 am
@reasoning logic,
The "Jesus Loves Slavery" idea was denied on this thread yesterday by our chief closet misogynist. The connection to "If You Love Jesus You Love Slavery" is a mere short and very fast synapse 0ne. Possibly too short and too fast to be noticed.

I didn't bother with the video though. There was no need. I know everything the geek is likely to say and a good bit more besides I shouldn't wonder. As Ben Franklin nearly said--without interruptions, points of order, slow handclapping and suchlike one might justify anything under the sun.

Party political broadcasts are Spam imo.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 12:02 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
spendius wrote:

Quote:
I am not a mysogynist in any way. Women are women. I enjoy interacting with them...and I do not demean them the way you do constantly.


Your use of "demean" is solid proof of your misogyny. I don't demean women. I simply state what they are like in general.


Actually, Spendius, you DO demean women...in many ways and often as I've ever seen it done.

My guess is that you disgust women...that they find you repulsive...which in turn accounts for the fact that you have so much negative to say about them.


Quote:
For you to say that what they are like is a fault, as you do with "demean", cannot mean anything else but that you think there is something wrong with them as they have evolved. They are evolved to be gold-diggers in the interest of the species.


I am getting surer and surer that they find you repulsive.


Quote:
Any body saying they are gold-diggers is complimenting them on being true to type and any body saying that the statement is "demeaning" obviously wants them to be not true to type because such a type is faulty. That's misogyny.


Do you actually buy into your own nonsense, Spendius?

Can you be more of a joke?


Quote:
I like women as they are. I find them fascinating and a challenge and have no wish to change their evolved nature. To say that a factual representation of female nature is "demeaning" blows you out of the water. Show me where I have misrepresented them.


You demean them in almost every post you write...and you are so hateful towards them you probably cannot see how demeaning you actually are.



Quote:

From your revelation of your assets we might assume your lode has never been prospected. Those of us with a lode worth prospecting have been worked on with a ruthless determination. In fact we make considerable efforts to wear the insignia of the value of our lodes for no other reason than to encourage us being worked on in that manner. Or at least until we are old enough to know better.

One only need look at the WAGS of highly paid sportsmen and the second wives (sic) or mistresses of men who got married before they made it.

Quote:
It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife.


Jane Austen.

Outside of the Bible that is probably the most well known sentence in western literature. And in Mansfield Park Admiral Crawford is made to say that a man with a good fortune who allows himself to be caught has taken leave of his senses.




Glad you finally worked Jane Austen into the thread. How does it feel to realize that she probably would find you as repulsive and pretentious as other women do?
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 12:03 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Quote:
I enjoy interacting with them


Sure you do so long as they behave in a manner you approve of.


I just enjoy interacting with them, Spendius.

Almost as much as I enjoy watching you dig this hole you are digging for yourself. Wink
Logicus
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 12:07 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Funny you use the term digging a hole.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 12:50 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
The connection to "If You Love Jesus You Love Slavery" is a mere short and very fast synapse 0ne. Possibly too short and too fast to be noticed.


Are we talking about the Jesus that our bible portrays him to be?
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  0  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 01:01 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
I didn't bother with the video though. There was no need.


spendius do you like comedy?

Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 01:27 pm
@Logicus,
Logicus wrote:

Funny you use the term digging a hole.


Okay...then laugh at it. Wink
Logicus
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 02:14 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Yes. I did.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 03:03 pm
@Logicus,
Logicus wrote:

Yes. I did.


So did I after you pointed it out, Logicus. It was an unintended play on words!
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 03:08 pm
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
spendius do you like comedy?


Love it. That's why I like Jane Austen so much.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 03:34 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Actually, Spendius, you DO demean women...in many ways and often as I've ever seen it done.


Not another sodding fatuous assertion. Can you not help it? In what way have I demeaned women?

Quote:
My guess is that you disgust women...that they find you repulsive...which in turn accounts for the fact that you have so much negative to say about them.


And another. They are like stepping stones to self-congratulatory conclusions. How can a guess account for anything? Sheesh!!

I would be a damn sight better off if you were correct. I was often called Tony Curtis. And Jesus would you believe?

I certainly would not like to have experienced women who didn't have a gold-digging bone in their bodies. What a sad and sorry world that would be.

You're saying nothing. Everything you say is an asserted pipe-dream. You have no answer. Women, in general, are gold-diggers. It is a fact. To state the fact is not to demean them at all. And to think it is demeans gold-digging and as they are gold-diggers, it's hard wired, you demean women. You are the misogynist. Some of them call make-up warpaint. Where fashions are paraded are called catwalks. That's why they stalk when on them.

The whole feminine beauty business is competitive gold-digging. And the competition is fierce. Moreso that men experience.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 03:40 pm
@Logicus,
Quote:
women who didn't have a gold-digging bone in their bodies


That one wasn't unintended Loggie.
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 03:48 pm
@spendius,

Quote:
Love it. That's why I like Jane Austen so much.



What do you think about the real Jane Austen?

spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 05:03 pm
@reasoning logic,
I think the BBC's attitude to Jane Austen is like a milkmaid's attitude to a well fed Jersey cow.

I saw a version of Mansfield Park the BBC put out and it had nothing to do with anything beyond salaries for actors, actresses, props and all the rest of the silly caboodle which was not only brazen theft of licence payer's money but the theft of Jane's art as well.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 11/24/2024 at 10:28:45