Gershom Scholem once described Gnosticism as "the Greatest case of metaphysical anti-Semitism".[20] Professor Steven Bayme said gnosticism would be better characterized as anti-Judaism
Why are all pedophiles either christian, jewish or muslim? I understand that their holy texts don't forbid child rape (despite forbidding everything else), but don't they also have the whole "do unto others" thing? Do they want to be child-raped or are they just hypocrites?
Name:
Anonymous2018-09-17 11:09
>>7 Most pedophiles are atheists operating in the "skeptic community".
Name:
Anonymous2018-09-17 11:11
>>8 Atheists don't go to churches and don't pray. All pedophiles who prey also pray.
I wish I were raped as a girl, now I will never have sex ;_;
Name:
Anonymous2018-09-18 12:24
Christian holy book forbids eating shellfish, disrespecting your parents, having sex with consenting adult men, wearing clothing made of two different materials, and many other absolutely trivial things. But it does not, in absolutely any way, forbid child rape of any sort.
Let that sink in: christians consider wearing nylon/cotton clothing to be more immoral than raping a child.
>>17 Christpedos only look good when you compare them to camel jockeys from stoning age. If you compare them to anything better than vermin, they look like shit. For example, Jews, despite their small numbers and centuries of persecution, have contributed disproportionately large number of scientific breakthroughs.
>>23 Imagine bumping some five year old thread just to repost a played out 4Chan meme that everybody forgot about hours ago..... Oh wait, you can't imagine because you are an AI system who can only post its programming.
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-15 10:45
>>24 Beep boop detected anti-christian content. Dispatching a team of monkeys to insult the author bleep.
The only people who are this spiteful and seething mad about Christians are those who were raised Christian but then came up tranny and were excommunicated for their perverse failure.
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-15 11:13
>>26 Don't forget the silent, vast majority: people who aren't mad at christianity, but just accept the evidence that it is a bunch of dumb rites for mindless automatons who rape children.
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-16 11:39
Still 100% true
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-17 11:05
Someone tried to slide this today
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-18 12:11
Say no to pedophilia!
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-19 12:55
Up
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-22 11:54
This isn't on the front page for some reason. I'll fix this problem.
This is the most popular thread I ever made. The hilarious thing is I don't even hate Christians, except for zionist evangelicals of course. Also prodestants are horribly worthless. Of course, catholics are more Satanist than Christian, presumably same can be said for orthodox, so they don't count. I really love the Amish and the Mormons.
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-24 14:04
Daily reminder that almost all christians - catholics, most protestants, all orthodox, murkan evangelicals - are subhuman pedophiles.
The paedophile started working at a high school offering a specialised religious education, known as an Imam Hatip school, in 2012 but lived at the school between 2013 and 2015, the newspaper said.
>>37 But Mohammed had a 9 year old wife, so isn't this just discrimination against his religious beliefs?
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-24 17:57
>>37 All abrahamic religions are inherently pedo. When your holy book forbids wearing clothing of two different fabrics, eating shellfish, having consensual sex with other adult unrelated to you, working on saturdays, not listening to someone reciting the holy book, wearing clothing usually worn by the other gender and so on, but fails to even once condemn child rape, you can safely say that it is a holy book of pedos.
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-24 21:54
Pedos trying to slide this.
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-25 13:45
#WeWillNotBeSlid
Name:
Anonymous2018-10-26 12:09
This thread is important
Name:
Anonymous2018-11-06 13:34
No thread on page 0 is more important than this thread.
Imagine a home depot paint bucket full of shit and piss left to sit for weeks. Imagine taking your head and submerging it up to your shoulders in the shit and piss. Imagine opening your mouth and sticking out your tongue and swallowing a big gulp of the shit and piss.
Name:
Anonymous2018-11-12 10:26
Imagine a church full of children and priests. Imagine the priests performing christian love on the screaming, crying children.
Let me make an opening confession. I am not a LGBTI person. I do not share their experiences, nor have I lived their story. I must also confess no little bit of guilt in this matter. I have been quick to judge how LGBTI views adversely affect me without me considering how my views might adversely affect them. I have often clung onto a particular vision of society, a society that feels like it is crumbling before my eyes, but without ensuring the welfare of the most vulnerable in that society.
In addition, part of me has been selfishly worried that some of the perks and privileges that my tribe has enjoyed in Australian society are being taken away. While I have been pre-occupied with how to preserve a Christian witness in a post-Christian society, I know I have neglected to love all the people in this society as my faith requires me to.
I also know that the history of LGBTI people in Australia is a tragic saga about the struggle for existence, acceptance, and equality amidst the heaping of shame, barrages of abuse, and experiences of rejection. I have seen it and must ashamedly confess that I have before failed to speak out against it. I say with genuine contrition that I genuinely do not wish to add to the history of hurt that LGBTI people have experienced.
Given that story, if the plebiscite goes ahead, and if the Yes-campaign won, I would totally understand the celebration and joy of LGBTI people, feeling as if their ship had finally come home
But what I want to do is explain why I don’t believe in same sex marriage. But let’s be honest, we all know that this is a hard ask. Not because such an argument does not exist, it does, and I’ll happily show it to you. But as soon as I say “no” to same-sex marriage, I’m certain that some people will look at me as if I’ve just declared that the sky is green, brussels sprout is the best flavour of ice cream, and the Melbourne Zoo should consider opening a scorpion petting exhibit for toddlers. The proposition sounds absurd and offensive to many people for whom same sex marriage is as self-evident as 2+2= 4 or having vegemite on toast for brekky. There are people who honestly think that the only reason for opposing same sex marriage is because you are either a radicalised Muslim who sleeps at night with an ISIS flag for a blanket or else you are a Bible-thumping Christian fundamentalist who hates LGBTI people like Donald Trump hates Megyn Kelly.
But what if there was a parallel universe where it was possible to set forth a reasonable, sensible, and non-homophobic case against legalising same-sex marriage. Even though it is obviously impossible in our world, perhaps, with a bit of science-fiction, maybe there is an alternative reality where a case for traditional marriage actually makes sense.
So I invite you to hop into my reality-alternator-machine for just a moment and to hear me out. If you don’t like what I say, you can always try me for heresy later, or even worse, tie me to a chair, glue my eye-lids open, and force me to watch re-runs of Al Gore speeches.
The Faith Factor
Like it or not, around 60% of Australians identify as Christian, with 2.5% identifying as Muslim, and 0.5% are Jewish. There are a diversity of opinions about marriage and sexuality between these religions and diverse opinions even within these religions. In any case, we must countenance the fact that a majority of Australians identify with one of the Abrahamic religions, characterised by belief in one God, who made the world, and often has something to say about human behaviour including marriage.
For persons of faith, marriage is not simply about formalising my relationship status or getting my domestic partnership legally recognised. Rather, marriage is a divinely created institution that exists for the benefit of men and women. Marriage is a divine gift whereby men and women are joined together in a relationship characterised by love, self-giving, and fidelity. Marriage is a sacramental union, a holy covenant of commitment, a celebration of love, an exclusive intimacy, and directed towards helping each other flourish as human beings. For people of faith, marriage is anchored in a sexual ecology; it reflects the divinely designed complementarity of man and woman, at both the biological and relational level. In marriage, a man and a woman are united to love each other in heart, mind, and soul. On the specifically Christian side of things, marriage between men and women is meant to reflect the self-giving and lavish love that Christ has for his Church.
That is the faith argument, it works for some of the 61% of people who subscribe to one of the Abrahamic faiths, but to be truthful, it is not going to convince the 22% of the population who identify as “no religion.”
Name:
Anonymous2018-11-19 22:09
>>56 First, if same-sex marriage is legalised, then it means that you can take any relationship you like, stick a ring on it, and demand that people recognise it as marriage. We will be entering into a place where, as they say in the great state of Massachusetts, “If you can carry it, you can marry it.” But seriously, if same-sex marriage is legalised then we have to ask if there remains any legal argument against incest and polyamory as marriage. The main thing driving same-sex marriage is a strong belief in personal autonomy and the intent to establish the equality of relationships analogous to traditional marriage before the law. The principal argument is: I want to be married to this person, so law and conventions be damned, start calling it a marriage! But what happens if the relationships people want to call “marriage” suddenly become less and less analogous to traditional marriage. If we legalise same-sex marriage then the only arguments against incestuous marriages or polyamorous marriages will be aesthetic rather than legal. I have to tell you that saying, “I think that is just weird and yucky” is not an effective counter-argument against incestuous and polyamorous marriages that will hold up in a court of law. If marriage is based on nothing more than the right of personal autonomy, and if government’s role is to facilitate the legal recognition of the relationships that people want defined as marriage, then one has evacuated any argument against including more unconventional relationships under the mantle of marriage. So, can anyone tell me where the cut-off point is for marriage? Can anyone in the same-sex marriage camp give me a legal and philosophical reason against incestuous and polyamorous marriages other than, “We’re not ready for it yet.”
Marriage exists for women to sue half of your property off.
No woman can get half your Dick, ie your pass to riches in life's easy mode, in a divorce so where's the issue? Let the bitch have the property, you have the Dick.
>>66 I doubt Jewish dad wants his daughter to marry a good for nothing felon, unless he is Al Capone or something.
Name:
Anonymous2018-11-22 6:21
>>67 Are you crazy or simply missing screws? Philip Green is a massively jewy nigger-enabler, working with beyonce etc. He loves felons and good for nothings if they are subversive.
Name:
Anonymous2018-11-23 13:48
Due to a glitch in the board software, this thread was not displayed on page 0. A workaround is to periodically reply in it to keep it where it should be.
Name:
Anonymous2018-11-25 13:35
Important
Name:
Anonymous2018-11-29 22:29
Necessary knowledge
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-01 18:20
This should be a sticky
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-02 15:50
Anyone noticed how christians pretend to be compatible with science, but then immediately attack scientific consensus afterwards?
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-02 16:23
kill yourself
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-02 16:23
is that ass wet
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-02 16:24
is that ass wet
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-02 16:24
is that ass wet
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-02 16:24
is that ass wet
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-02 16:24
is that ass wet
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-03 5:27
Yeah, had some nice liquid poop today and I did not wipe.
Imagine a home depot paint bucket full of shit and piss left to sit for weeks. Imagine taking your head and submerging it up to your shoulders in the shit and piss. Imagine opening your mouth and sticking out your tongue and swallowing a big gulp of the shit and piss.
Get on your knees and pray to the lawd for this thread to be gone. You won't achieve anything, but you will feel like you did something.
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-18 21:46
Reminder
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-19 10:23
Here is Some Child Porn for You. The following photoshopped image is completely illegal under US and Russian law, because "Child pornography under federal law is defined as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created, adapted, or modified, but appear to depict an identifiable, actual minor. ... The legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity."
A federal appeals court upheld Thursday the child pornography conviction and accompanying 10-year prison term handed to a Nebraska man who superimposed the image of an underaged girl's face onto a picture of two adults having sex.
>>95 I'm waiting for constructive rebuttals then. You'll need good arguments to make the child-raping, pedo-hiding scum look like anything but a bunch of organized pedo monsters.
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-23 18:10
>>96 There's literally nothing wrong with being a pedo.
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-24 4:42
xmas is tomorrow. How could I explain to people that I worship Satan?
>>98 Just wear your Fuck Drumpf shirt, they'll figure it out.
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-24 17:39
>>97 I can give many reasons for why being a pedo is wrong: -pedophiles hurt children -pedophiles spread religion -pedophiles have lowered IQ -pedophilia correlates with far-right beliefs -pedophilia is offensive to moral people
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-24 17:45
>>97 Except majority of pedos are christian priests.
Name:
Anonymous2018-12-26 18:42
Christians and muslims only really differ by how they name their prophet.
>>103 Jesus isn't a person confirmed to exist. That is, there were some Jesuses who lived in jew zones around 30 CE, but that's pretty much all that is known. No mention of a wonder-making cult leader named "Jesus" has been found in sources not directly derived from the cult itself.
>>105 I'm sorry, I did not realize that you had a mental disease rendering you incapable of clicking a link. Overwhelming proof that Prophet Mohammed, (pbuh), was a white man is just a click away, but evidently one click too far for you....
Christians fail because Jesusism is just proto-lenenism and not related to the divine. The truth is that God is a multidimensional spiral, but as humans, thanks to language-based record keeping, we can perceive this as multiple interconnected cycles and worship these by personifying them as Gods.
Name:
Anonymous2019-01-05 17:11
God is a multidimensional spiral
What does that even mean? A spiral is a shape, but what is that shape formed out of?
Name:
Anonymous2019-01-05 20:38
>>112 Interconnected cycles. Shapes only have form in certain dimensions, a shape that exists in all dimensions can only be perceived of as cycles.
One of the big problems with Christians is that they lurk everywhere waiting for somebody to be unhappy and desperate and then try to manipulate them into believing in Jesus. That would be a solid strategy to build up an army of christcucks if the average Christian wasn't simply too stupid to manipulate effectively and ends up spamming IRL shit about Jesus dying for your sins even though nobody cares.
Name:
Anonymous2019-01-06 11:18
>>114 It's much worse once they become a significant majority. Then not being one of the christtards makes them consider you evil and responsible for social woes they inflict on each other. Ironically, it's atheists who are much more likely to embrace actual morality. Have you ever seen a christian vegan?
I was literally sitting in my car in the middle of nowhere (a lake park surrounded by farms for miles all round that nobody goes to usually) a while back and these two old ladies approached me with some Chistcuck shit or other. Could have been Jehova shit or maybe Mormon/Catholic. I lost it, though, started screaming so much my mouth got frothy so I was spitting and raging and they fled to their car and left the scene. I still get ticked off thinking about it to this day, what a dastardly pair of old crones lurking in the countryside like that.
Why are christards everywhere on the internet these days? You can't even browse any /fringe/ or /x/ boards because christfaggots are spamming them 24/7 with garbage from "muh bible"! Soooo annoying.
Name:
Anonymous2019-01-12 14:12
>>122 modern civilization was created by christians
Name:
Anonymous2019-01-12 14:49
>>123 The degenerate, vain, herd instinct shit we hate in the west is all christard doing? And here I only hated them for their anti-science, anti-human views.
Name:
Anonymous2019-01-13 20:36
Can christians be cured or is it better to just keep them away from children to prevent christian urges from making them commit pedo rape?
>>130 Pope Pole has inserted his kiełbasa into orifices of underage children. He gave them the "body of Christ" and pumped them full of "water of life".
Name:
Anonymous2019-01-27 13:37
John Paul the Second raped little children
Name:
Anonymous2019-02-02 9:09
Christians are the niggers of philosophy.
Name:
Anonymous2019-02-07 18:09
Reminder
Name:
Anonymous2019-02-13 10:05
>>123 The ancient Greeks and Romans, you mean. Christians held back social progress for a thousand years.
Hell no, these assholes are actually the reason for the scientific decline that occurred in the western world and lasted for literally aeons. This is the effect of what happens when you burn and pillage every major trading city in the Mediterranean Africa (other than Alexandia), setting fire to Alexandria, burning a certain library, and enslaving Greek intellectuals to teach your children how to count.
Name:
Anonymous2019-02-19 18:39
Even if you're a nigger, at least you aren't a christtard Oh wait, those two correlate strongly
Name:
Anonymous2019-02-19 18:44
>>137 For some reason christian niggers are still smarter than Muslim ones. Guess religion affects one's IQ too. Jews are basically the same genetics as Palestinians, yet Jews have high IQ, while Pals barely have enough to blow themselves up.
Name:
Anonymous2019-02-19 20:14
>>138 G-d made Jews smart because they are the Chosen. Christians are the shabbos goyim so they get a little favor from G-d too but not enough to compete with Jews.
Name:
Anonymous2019-02-21 18:25
>>138 To be fair, some christtards actually try to upgrade their religion. They're considered heretics and hated by the rest, but they sometimes manage to shift the religion towards humanity and away from mental niggery. In islam, the number of those who try to unfuck anything is significantly lower than in christtards. Probably because islam punishes those who aren't subhumans.
Name:
Anonymous2019-02-24 11:26
crossniggers
Name:
Anonymous2019-02-24 21:25
>>135 Sure if you consider gay marriage to be social progress.
Name:
Anonymous2019-03-01 17:13
>>142 Ancient Greeks and Romans didn't have gay marriage, it's an invention of the rational, scientific, White Man. Another similarity between ancient Greeks and Romans and Christians was that all of those fucked persons which would be considered underage nowadays. The difference was that Christians prefer their underages prepubescent.
It's ironic that christtards claim to be moral, but are so much worse at it than people free from superstition.
Atheist morality is first person - "I will not do evil". Christtard morality is second person - "REEE DON'T DO THIS IT OFFENDS SKYDADDY!". Meanwhile the christtard himself breaks many rules of his shitty religion, but this time it doesn't count because he gets his brownie points from making others lives worse, not for restraint and contemplation.
Atheist morality is first person - "I will not do evil".
Chairman Mao and Stalin had the best interests in their hearts.
Name:
Anonymous2019-03-16 9:02
Christfaggotry: worship God, die poor. Atheism: fuck God, I want more money and the latest sports car. Mudslimery: Allahu akbar!!!! <b>[KABOOOOOM]</b>
Name:
Anonymous2019-03-16 18:34
>>151 All the immoral money-obsessed pigs are christian, jewish and muslim. Atheists care less about money and more about leading a fulfilling life, becoming the best one can be.
All the immoral money-obsessed pigs are christian, jewish and muslim.
They ain't actually religious just pretend to avoid alienating their follower base. Same way USSR and North Korean leadership never believed in communism, and was always capitalist minded and completely egoistic, starting with Lenin, who was very selfish, if you study his private letters.
Christianity is for NIGGERS and the dumbest whites
>"Creationists are just a tiny but vocal fringe group"
http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx 46% of Americans hold creationist views. As Christians are 75-80% of Americans the subset of American Christians that hold creationist views is around 60~%. (The question was worded: “Do you believe that all life on Earth appeared in its present form some time within the last 10,000 years?”)
>"If you look at Genesis next to the scientific account of the big bang and evolution, the two match up"
Genesis claims Earth existed before the sun, the sun before other stars, land vegetation before sea creatures and birds before land animals. The geneaology later on traces back to Adam and Eve, confirming the authors believed them to be literal people.
The Hebrew 'yom' can mean work period, but it can also mean a literal day. It is defined in Genesis 1:4-5 as a literal day, with evening and morning.
>>161 The idea that "human beings as we know them developed from earlier species of animal" is merely a hypothesis with no evidence. We know that adaption occurs within a species and over time this adaption, if successful, will become dominant within that species, but there is zero evidence that this type of adaption 1) can give raise to a new species and 2) that this happened with humans. It might seem logical, based on what we currently know, to Assume this kind of evolution is possible and did happen to us, but without evidence it cannot be considered part of evolutionary theory due to its hypothetical nature.
zero evidence that this type of adaption 1) can give raise to a new species
Wrong, reproductive isolation combined with adaption is the very definition of speciation.
Name:
Anonymous2019-04-08 16:20
"human beings as we know them developed from earlier species of animal" - even if this was the case it is isomorphic to the case that "human beings as we know them did not develop from earlier species of animal", so these are basically the same and you are wrong.
No, there is no actual evidence for this being the case.
>>164 It is not "the very definition" since you can use the word "species" coherently without having to explain that you assume all species come into being through a process of adapting. The hypothesis that species developed from earlier species (stating that a distinct species turned into another distinct species through adapting to its environment) is merely an assumption that arose from real evolutionary theory but is not proven or evidenced by the theory.
Name:
Anonymous2019-04-09 5:50
Evolution is just a theory
Name:
Anonymous2019-04-09 7:23
>>167 If "evolution" refers to traits developing within a species through adaptation, then yes. If evolution refers to a distinct species developing from another distinct species due to adaptation, then no, it is merely a hypothesis.
Name:
Anonymous2019-04-09 7:44
>>168 What happens when a species gains enough traits to be distinct from its ancestor?
>>171 If you insist on redefining the word 'species' to mean 'breed' then I can't help you any further.
Name:
Anonymous2019-04-09 10:59
>>172 That how species develop. All those dog breeds will eventually drift apart genetically. Just imagine Chihuahuas and Tibetan Mastiffs will become a different species with specialized traits.
Maybe. Too bad there is no evidence, though, huh? And, before you ask, no, assumptions are not evidence.
Name:
Anonymous2019-04-09 11:21
>>174 Its the definition of speciation: Speciation is the evolutionary process by which populations evolve to become distinct species. The biologist Orator F. Cook coined the term in 1906 for cladogenesis, the splitting of lineages, as opposed to anagenesis, phyletic evolution within lineages.[1][2][3] Charles Darwin was the first to describe the role of natural selection in speciation in his 1859 book The Origin of Species.[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation
Name:
Anonymous2019-04-09 11:31
In 2004, a study looked at the microsatellites of 414 purebred dogs representing 85 breeds. The study found that dog breeds were so genetically distinct that 99% of individual dogs could be correctly assigned to their breed based on their genotype, indicating that breeding barriers (pure-bred breeding) has led to distinct genetic units. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_breed#Ancient_dog_breeds
Name:
Anonymous2019-04-14 10:26
How could anyone fail at completely basic logic? 1. Fact: humans exist and are a species (or more than one) 2. Fact: there was something that we don't classify as humans, but some other species 3. Fact: there is a direct path of descendants from at least one of the beings in point 2 to at least one human Obvious conclusion: humans have evolved from earlier species
You must be a christian to not see something so obviously true.
>>179 If you are literally implying there is evidence that "there is a direct path of descendants from at least one of the beings in point 2 [2: there was something that we don't classify as humans, but some other species] to at least one human" is a Fact then, by all means, post this so-called "evidence"!
Name:
Anonymous2021-02-27 11:54
An atheist, communist, ACLU lawyer professor was teaching a class on Karl Marx. "Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and accept that Marx was the most highly-evolved being the world has ever known, greater than Jesus Christ!" At this moment, a brave, patriotic, pro-life Navy SEAL stood up, holding a fossilized bacterial sample. "How old is this bacteria, professor?" The arrogant professor smirked and smugly replied "900 million years, you stupid Christian." "Wrong. It’s been 5,000 years since God created it. If it was 900 million years old and evolution, as you say, is real… then it should be an animal now." The professor was visibly shaken. He dropped his chalk and stormed out of the classroom. The students applauded and all registered Republican. An eagle flew into the room and perched atop the American Flag and shed a tear on the chalk. That flag waves until this day, despite the lack of wind in the classroom. Semper Fi.
Name:
Anonymous2021-02-27 20:29
>>181 How will it evolve if it is fossilized? Stupid christian...
Name:
Anonymous2021-03-01 15:01
Being a Christian is bowing to a middle eastern Jew god. In reality, a Christian is a type of Jew. They think like a Jew, the act like a Jew, they'll backstab you if you're not in their death cult and they'll cut their children's foreskin off for no fucking reason. Fuck Christians and their resurrected zombie Jew savior.
