57
   

Why do you suppose Jesus never condemned slavery?

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 05:12 pm
@spendius,
The latest entry on the Acronym thread contributed by a lady of estimable virtue--

Quote:
Some predatory ladies exploit NOTORIOUS dalliances, Inez did last year.


What Apisa should do is get a beat up violin and go round restaurants on Valentine's Day playing Love's Old Sweet Song.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 05:40 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

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.


Keep on digging, Spendius. You are hilarious.

Sorry you hate women so much. Most of us know where that comes from.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jul, 2013 05:41 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

The latest entry on the Acronym thread contributed by a lady of estimable virtue--

Quote:
Some predatory ladies exploit NOTORIOUS dalliances, Inez did last year.


What Apisa should do is get a beat up violin and go round restaurants on Valentine's Day playing Love's Old Sweet Song.


Get the Mommie conflict resolved, Spendius. You are much too old for this kind of thing.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 12:14 am
So, what is it?
Jesus did not condemn slavery because Frank refuses to learn the violin and, instead, insists on playing golf.
Is this true, Frank?
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 03:47 am
@neologist,
It's no use asking Apisa any questions neo. Have you not noticed? All he can manage is some mature male New Joiysian blurting and tongue pulling out be-shitten with a few cliches he's seen in women's journalism.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 04:28 am
@spendius,
There was a neat juxtaposition on the news over the weekend. The Pope celebrating Mass on the beach in Brazil and the North Korean ceremonies to mark the 6oth anniversary of the armistice. The latter looked considerably better organised.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 11:25 am
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

It's no use asking Apisa any questions neo. Have you not noticed? All he can manage is some mature male New Joiysian blurting and tongue pulling out be-shitten with a few cliches he's seen in women's journalism.


I answer questions, Spendius...and I answer the question asked. What you do is to posture and primp in a fruity way...with as much pomposity and pretentiousness as possible…usually including references to people and issues that have no bearing whatever on the matters being discussed. You obviously are a tortured person--so lacking in self-confidence you have to go through these theatrics in order to ease your pain…so I pity you. But damn…I cannot help but laugh out loud at your nonsense, because it is funny as a Monty Python skit.

Funnier! Wink
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 12:35 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
posture and primp in a fruity way


That sounds like a good album title.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 02:02 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
I answer questions, Spendius...and I answer the question asked.


You have won too many fights with a punch bag. Real life antagonists are not to your liking.

It began with the "all men are rapists" mantra of Germaine Greer, on to the debate between her and Mailer in NYC, during which he took his dick out and banged it on the table and then the feminist chant of "romance is rape" and SCUM. (Society for Cutting Up Men). I was flat out at it with singles and marrieds alike at the time. I think marriage is an institution designed to replace slave's shackles.

Your method of dealing with such things would have been to declare Greer repulsive, pompous and pretentious. You would have said she had odd attitudes to her father, hated men, a range of masturbation kit, and was a tortured spirit who you pitied and various other lines in play-pen bullshit designed to assure you that she had no point and was safe to ignore and carry on as before.

I'm made of sterner stuff unfortunately and so I studied her argument because I didn't like the idea that she thought I was a rapist what with her being such a clever young lady and all. It involved force, bribery and hypnosis. I could easily deny the force. The bribery not so easily. The box of chocolates, the buying drinks, the holding open of doors, the cheapo Valentine card were all mentioned by the lesser brigade of romance is rapers and I was well guilty of them all. In fact ROMANCE IS RAPE was a banner, front page headline in a newspaper I saw which had been infiltrated by the Professoress of Women's Studies at a university within the rag's circulation area. So I knocked all that stuff on the head and set out to show my victim's willingness by having them make sacrifices to take advantage of whatever it was they made them for. I had thought of getting them to sign a document but I knew the feminists would say I had used hypnosis on them and was thus invalid and not evidence of compliance. Having them drive a fair distance was my first idea. I ended up having the Chairman of the Planning Committee's wife climb a ladder into a hayloft on the night her husband was making an important speech to local industrialists. In her best bib and tucker. Tight skirt, high heels. I thought that would convince any jury.

Then some jokers released a chart topping single Sergeant Rock is Gonna Help Me make the girls stand in line. Or something like that. And a chap got charged with raping his wife which the traditionalists said was an impossibility because she had agreed in public with her vows. The case changed the law and now we can be charged with raping our wives. In the marital double bed too.

But it was the song. The implication was Greer's hypnosis thing. We men had the whole mind-zap operation geared up to making them think they were missing something, what Julie Burchill referred to as a "little local irritation" in the presence of her ex-husband in a TV discussion, if they were not getting shagged and were probably neurotic as well and generally all screwed up. So they granted compliance under hypnosis.

I couldn't get out of that. And I knew, being well educated, that I couldn't answer it with girl's playground blurtings.

So I became much more objective about the lovely little darlings but I can hear my bath water being run so I'll have to leave off there.

With just time to say that it's all in Jane Austen if you take the trouble to learn to read. She would have loved me because I accepted by then that I was there to be used. And not use.

Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 02:12 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Quote:
I answer questions, Spendius...and I answer the question asked.


You have won too many fights with a punch bag. Real life antagonists are not to your liking.

It began with the "all men are rapists" mantra of Germaine Greer, on to the debate between her and Mailer in NYC, during which he took his dick out and banged it on the table and then the feminist chant of "romance is rape" and SCUM. (Society for Cutting Up Men). I was flat out at it with singles and marrieds alike at the time. I think marriage is an institution designed to replace slave's shackles.

Your method of dealing with such things would have been to declare Greer repulsive, pompous and pretentious. You would have said she had odd attitudes to her father, hated men, a range of masturbation kit, and was a tortured spirit who you pitied and various other lines in play-pen bullshit designed to assure you that she had no point and was safe to ignore and carry on as before.

I'm made of sterner stuff unfortunately and so I studied her argument because I didn't like the idea that she thought I was a rapist what with her being such a clever young lady and all. It involved force, bribery and hypnosis. I could easily deny the force. The bribery not so easily. The box of chocolates, the buying drinks, the holding open of doors, the cheapo Valentine card were all mentioned by the lesser brigade of romance is rapers and I was well guilty of them all. In fact ROMANCE IS RAPE was a banner, front page headline in a newspaper I saw which had been infiltrated by the Professoress of Women's Studies at a university within the rag's circulation area. So I knocked all that stuff on the head and set out to show my victim's willingness by having them make sacrifices to take advantage of whatever it was they made them for. I had thought of getting them to sign a document but I knew the feminists would say I had used hypnosis on them and was thus invalid and not evidence of compliance. Having them drive a fair distance was my first idea. I ended up having the Chairman of the Planning Committee's wife climb a ladder into a hayloft on the night her husband was making an important speech to local industrialists. In her best bib and tucker. Tight skirt, high heels. I thought that would convince any jury.

Then some jokers released a chart topping single Sergeant Rock is Gonna Help Me make the girls stand in line. Or something like that. And a chap got charged with raping his wife which the traditionalists said was an impossibility because she had agreed in public with her vows. The case changed the law and now we can be charged with raping our wives. In the marital double bed too.

But it was the song. The implication was Greer's hypnosis thing. We men had the whole mind-zap operation geared up to making them think they were missing something, what Julie Burchill referred to as a "little local irritation" in the presence of her ex-husband in a TV discussion, if they were not getting shagged and were probably neurotic as well and generally all screwed up. So they granted compliance under hypnosis.

I couldn't get out of that. And I knew, being well educated, that I couldn't answer it with girl's playground blurtings.

So I became much more objective about the lovely little darlings but I can hear my bath water being run so I'll have to leave off there.

With just time to say that it's all in Jane Austen if you take the trouble to learn to read. She would have loved me because I accepted by then that I was there to be used. And not use.




As I said, you posture and primp in a fruity way, Spendius...with as much pomposity and pretentiousness as possible…usually including references to people and issues that have no bearing whatever on the matters being discussed.

Which is, of course, what you did here in this response.

I do feel pity for you that you have to be so pretentious, but if you do not see how hilarious this kind of thing is, you are also devoid of a humor bone.



http://i276.photobucket.com/albums/kk17/frankapisa/Misc/Monty20Python20Logo_zpsd30cd715.jpg
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 03:31 pm
@Frank Apisa,
There are no matters being discussed because you have no idea whether Jesus condemned slavery or not and neither do any of us. You have an fatuity. What is there to discuss except your motive for trying to work the ruse on A2Kers just because you have found it easy to not get laughed at when you work it in the social circles which are unfortunate enough to include you. Them being so polite and all which we have no need to be as you demonstrate regularly.
reasoning logic
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 03:41 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
There are no matters being discussed because you have no idea whether Jesus condemned slavery or not and neither do any of us.



Luke 12:47
Quote:
And that servant, who knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
Shocked
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 03:51 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

There are no matters being discussed because you have no idea whether Jesus condemned slavery or not and neither do any of us.


There ARE matters being discussed here. Have you been asleep? You are correct that I do not know if Jesus condemned slavery or not...and I have acknowledged that many times in this thread. I do not even know if Jesus actually existed...and I have acknowledge that also.

But assuming Jesus did exist...why did none of his chroniclers ever mention that he condemned slavery?

Jeez!

Quote:

You have an fatuity. What is there to discuss except your motive for trying to work the ruse on A2Kers just because you have found it easy to not get laughed at when you work it in the social circles which are unfortunate enough to include you. Them being so polite and all which we have no need to be as you demonstrate regularly.


Now you are saying there is something to discuss...after insisting there weren't. Are you posting from the Pub, Spendius?

Sorry you think that you think a "social circle" which includes me is "unfortunate" because it does.

Your last sentence must have been composed after you drained a pint. It is as garbled as your thinking.

And now for something totally different:

You do enjoy Monty Python…do you not?
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 03:54 pm

Jesus speaking (supposedly):

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets. I have come, not to abolish them, but to fulfill them. Of this much I assure you; UNTIL HEAVEN AND EARTH PASS AWAY, not the smallest letter of the law, not the smallest part of a letter shall be done away with until it all comes true." Matthew 5:17ff


Now…here is part of “the law”…which Jesus says he is NOT here to abolish:


"Slaves, male and female, you may indeed possess, provided you BUY them from among the neighboring nations. You may also BUY them from among the aliens who reside with you and from their children who are born and reared in your land. Such slaves YOU MAY OWN AS CHATTELS, and leave to your sons as their hereditary property, MAKING THEM PERPETUAL SLAVES. But you shall not lord it harshly over any of the Israelites, your kinsmen." Leviticus 25:44ff

Get the picture, Spendius?
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 04:47 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Get the picture, Spendius?


Do you have a picture of it or do I have to use my imagination?

Can you imagine a picture of the last supper with slaves serving them supper and men standing out of the way with whips just in case the slaves need many stripes? Twisted Evil
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 04:58 pm
@Frank Apisa,
I don't think Python even slightly funny. Tragic more like. The famous parrot sketch is straight out of Roget. They probably had to copy it out longhand in those days whereas we just cut and paste.

Obarmy is funny. The cops smashing vice rings is funny. You keep paying for it I mean on account of being so shocked that such things are allowed to happen like the good little Christian boys you are.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 05:04 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Jesus didn't give a flying **** about slavery.
reasoning logic
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 05:05 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
Jesus didn't give a flying **** about slavery.


How do you know this? We do know that it was close to the heart of the church.

We know that the good ship Jesus depended upon it don't we?
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 05:18 pm
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
How do you know this?


Render unto etc.
reasoning logic
 
  0  
Reply Mon 29 Jul, 2013 05:22 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
Render unto etc.


Render onto the lord obedience to your master whether he is nice or cruel?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 11/24/2024 at 08:30:33