I know of this Jack Chick dude only because I'm interested in roleplaying (pen 'n paper, the real deal), and he is one of the ongoing jokes in that community. Why? Because he thinks roleplaying is satanic. He's made several cartoons depicting his "Holier than thou" Christian characters saving desillusioned roleplayers.
But this has nothing to do with roleplaying. This is just too absurd for me. I was damn near falling off my chair laughing while reading this bullsh*t he's now made.
What do you think of this? (
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/5020/5020_01.asp?FROM=bibleseries)
Cjais why do you enjoy posting things about Christianity that make you laugh? Do you enjoy beating down Christianity? I didn't find it funny at all.
In fact thats the way many people are saved (not the beating up but the person talking to them about Jesus)
Because this 'tard apparently doesn't know anything about Islam.
Did you notice which compelling "arguments" he used to persuade Omar? God loves you, Allah does not. How clever.
It says riiight here in the Bible that only Jesus can save you, and only He can forgive your sins.
So, when did the Bible become fact, when did people fall for these absurd statements, and when did Jesus have monopoly on saving people?
I just don't understand why practically every post you do put in here is bashing Christianity.
And Cjais yes he is right about Islam... Allah is depicted "as a severe judge and is not depicted as loving."
Originally posted by Reborn Outcast
I just don't understand why practically every post you do put in here is bashing Christianity.
Get your facts straight. And don't evade the subject.
And Cjais yes he is right about Islam... Allah is depicted "as a severe judge and is not depicted as loving."
Where did you get this? Your "handy online guide to religions different from Christianity"?
I could say exactly the same for the Christian god.
Originally posted by Cjais
And don't evade the subject.
I didn't think there was one... but if there was then... I didn't think that cartoon was funny at all.
im along with cjais. this dude doesnt know **** about islam or anything. if im not mistaken isnt he the man that said islam trains kids to kill americans from birth? anways. i agree with cjais. as usual because hes rational. if only he ran for president of the US.
Ah Cjais nevermind. Now that I see what you're saying he is being pretty extreme in that cartoon. My mistake.
That cartoon was so horrible that you can't even laugh of it! It was such an insult to Islam, and not only that, it was also bad christianity-propaganda.
The guy who made this is a real maniac, and a shame for all the christians in the world.
Or, you could simply look at this:
http://www.chick.com/catalog/comics/0106.asp)
How can anyone be allowed to sell such crap?
Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn
Or, you could simply look at this:
http://www.chick.com/catalog/comics/0106.asp)
How can anyone be allowed to sell such crap?
I'll be damned if I didn't feel like busting a cap in his ass when I read that.
"This comic proves that the "science" of evolution can only be labeled as misleading theory. Many are being brainwashed in the schools and through the media into believing the Bible is false and that evolution is a scientific fact. Now it's time they are told the truth!"
I've seen better evidence for creationism being presented in this forum.
It's not the point he's trying to make that bothers me. It's the cartoon, happy-ending, morally superior, bunnies-and-flowers-way he does it. I hate him now.
Originally posted by Cjais
I've seen better evidence for creationism being presented in this forum. thats pretty sad. that people at these forums give better evidence than a quote professional.
Even though I am a firm believer in the Christian ways, Role Playing is NOT satanic.
Thats just that.
However, there are some follies in the cartoon. Such as the Islamic,Muslim whatever he was, saying that he wouldn't have helped the christian if the roles were reversed. Ahem. He would have. The Muslim religion does not teach to hate everyone and not help them if they need it.
The guy who portrayed the Christian did it well, however. When it came the time to minister to someone, he did it.
Oh yay. Jack Chick.
He is a sad, strange little man, and he has my pity. ;)
I would take most of the things he says about Christianity with a very large grain of salt. Although obi can tell you that in the example you have, the actions of the Christian were accurate.
But as a Christian I find his tracts offensive to read (because of the impression it gives of us people like you, Cjais), and as an artist I find his art offensive to look at. ;)
I think this guy needs to be force fed the movie Dogma. It actually has some quality stuff in there...better than his arguments anyway.
The whole ideas instead of beliefs thing got to me, and I totally agree with the structure of religion damaging what lies at its base.
Like C'Jais said: That guy is a joke. And a bad one at that. His style is most similiar to what you see in old DDR schoolbooks (fact). He's a prime example of Christianity.
Anyway, this (
http://www.theescapist.com/basic_gaming_faq.htm#badthings) is why he's wrong about RPG (amongst other reasons). For those of you who think that RPG is the work of Lucifer, Slanesh, ect: Look and learn. For those who do not: Have a good laugh.
ARG!
ARGGH!
:swear: :swear: :swear:
This reminds me of a creationist-comic I read a while ago at work. I couldn't get anything done that day because it simply stunned me with it's stupidity. I was too pissed to to be mad.
I can not believe the crap they're trying to pull! :mad:
If someone knows where I can find this particular cartoon again, please let me know or post it here. Here's the scenario:
A ugly bald fat sweaty professor is keeping a biology lecture when suddenly a beautiful blonde bright-eyed young man stands up and humiliates him and his ridiculous evolution-theories.
A moment later all the 100 students that first laughed at him are all like: "OOH You are sooo right! How dumb we were believing in these silly theories! Tell me more about Jesus! Please tell us more about God oh you handsome blonde young man you!"
I'm not sure if I can control myself so I'll just say it quickyl and move on to other things. Thinking about this makes me want to tear my hair out.
check out these links.
Here is why Islam is wrong and Christianity is right:
http://www.chick.com/information/religions/islam/fallacies.asp)
Can you believe this:
Since Islam came along many centuries after Christianity, Islam has the burden of proof and not Christianity. The Bible tests and judges the Qur'an. When the Bible and The Qur'an contradict each other, the Bible must logically be given first place as the older authority. The Qur'an is in error until it proves itself.
Some Muslims violate the principle of historical precedent by asserting that Islam does not have the burden of proof and that the Qur'an judges the Bible.
How wasted does a person have to be in order to agree with that?! I am amazed.
Another one:
http://www.chick.com/information/religions/islam/errors.asp)
Here we see that Islam is wrong because we can prove SCIENTIFICALLY (don't even get me started on this one..) that the Qur'an has one error in it.
(The mistake was based on the erroneous assumption that the earth was flat. The authors of the Qur'an did not know that the earth was a sphere which revolved around the sun.)
ARG!
Ah, it gets worse, people:
http://www.chick.com/bc/1997/witchcraftmasonry.asp?FROM=Masonryinfo)
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0046/0046_01.asp)
http://www.chick.com/reading/books/204/0204_10.asp)
The devil is using many different tools today to trick young people into riding the fast lane down the stairway to hell.
One of the most dangerous and widespread of all those tools is his fantasy role playing game, Dungeons and Dragons.
Literally millions of young people are unknowingly participating in genuine occult practices and opening the doors for demons to enter their bodies through this seemingly innocent game.
By the time they find out they were hood-winked, it's too late. They have taken that last step down the stairway to hell and are greeted by the engulfing flames.
:rofl::rofl: That's so ridiculous!
here i was thinking it was about chicks.....:rolleyes:
and i didn't get the comic either:p
One of the most dangerous and widespread of all those tools is his fantasy role playing game, Dungeons and Dragons
Excuse me if I mess my pants whilest laughing. :)
Ok Cjais you have my sincere apoligies because that guy is sooo messed up.
D & D...
:laughing: :laughing: :rofl: :rofl: :lol: :lol:
I just couldn't resist:
The Bible is in error until it proves itself.
#3 Proving Christianity by the Bible and then proving the Bible by Christianity.
b. Logically, it is irrelevant whether the text of the Bible has been preserved because preservation does not logically imply inspiration. A book can be perfectly copied without implying its inspiration.
When a Christian argues that history or science "proves" the Bible, this actually means that he is acknowledging that history and science can likewise refute the Bible. If the Bible contains just one historical error or one scientific error, then the Bible is not the Word of God. Verification and falsification go hand in hand.
If he can refute Science, then God wins by default. But this is logically erroneous. You cannot prove your position by refuting someone else's position. The theory of evolution and the Bible could both be wrong. Christians must prove their own theories.
Many Christians believe in the Bible as a blind leap of faith. They really do not care if it is filled with mistakes and contradictions. As far as they are concerned, they were born Christian and they will die Christian. The more closed minded they are, the more fanatical they become in their religion. When ignorance unites with arrogance, fanaticism is born.
They do not believe in Christianity because it is true. To them Christianity is true because they believe it.
The mistake was based on the erroneous assumption that the earth was flat. The authors of the Bible did not know that the earth was a sphere which revolved around the sun.
Sorry if I offended anyone in here. It's his words. Not mine.
But he's really not that dumb. Jack Chick is fairly clever as you all can see. He just lacks the ability to see things from the other person's side. Lack of empathy - a sure sign of any sociopath.
Originally posted by Reborn Outcast
Ok Cjais you have my sincere apoligies because that guy is sooo messed up.
D & D...
All forgiven.
Once you start to delve into his clearly raving mind, it's obvious to anyone that he's.... mad.
Did I say that? - C'jais
If I had to choose what is the single most stupid, annoying thing I've ever read, it would this:
"the Bible must logically be given first place as the older authority. The Qur'an is in error until it proves itself.
Some Muslims violate the principle of historical precedent by asserting that Islam does not have the burden of proof..."
Oh and Cjais...the point you made by switching "Qur'an" with "Bible" is moot.
As mr. Chick said: The Bible is the older authority. You can not criticize it unless you have first proven that the Qur'an is true, which it is not 'cause it has a scientifically proven error in it.
You can not win, Cjais.
Hahahaha! Chick ownz, he is teh man! :rolleyes:
And the Bible has many historical inaccuracies - one easy one to spot is the Census that being held - this was in a part of the Roman Empire, which at the time was not holding a census, according to historical documents........
So, therefore we have proven the Bible to be false since the Romans did not hold a census at the time given, that would lead to Joseph and Mary needing to travel to Bethlahem, therefore Jesus
(An interpreted word - not his actual name - Did not the Angel Gabriel name him Emmanuel? Then again in it's conversion to English no doubt there are many "inaccuracies" that exist) would not have been born there....
I could go on all day about them, but that would be a mute point, since one false piece of it disproves the rest....
Originally posted by Luc Solar
Oh and Cjais...the point you made by switching "Qur'an" with "Bible" is moot.
As mr. Chick said: The Bible is the older authority. You can not criticize it unless you have first proven that the Qur'an is true, which it is not 'cause it has a scientifically proven error in it.
You can not win, Cjais.
Jack Chick can go piss on electric fences for all I care.
I'm just surprised that his definition of fanaticism and false evidence is so clear and true, yet he's completely unable to apply it to his own religion.
And I'm surprised he's apparently read the Koran, but still haven't realized he's making hypocritical statements and false generalizations of it.
Our gene pool would be better off without him. But that's social darwinism, and I doubt he believes in that.
Originally posted by BCanr2d2
And the Bible has many historical inaccuracies - one easy one to spot is the Census that being held - this was in a part of the Roman Empire, which at the time was not holding a census, according to historical documents........
Show me the documentation before you say that. Post a link to something that confirms that.
Originally posted by BCanr2d2
Jesus
(An interpreted word - not his actual name - Did not the Angel Gabriel name him Emmanuel? Then again in it's conversion to English no doubt there are many "inaccuracies" that exist) would not have been born there....
Matthew 1:20-21: "But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save people from their sins." "
Now regarding your Immanuel statement,
Matthew 1:22-23: "All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" - which means, "God with us." "
Immanuel fulfilled the phrophet and thats what the people would come to call him because they knew he was the Son of God. His real name was Jesus, Immanuel was a "nickname" from the people.
Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn
One of the most dangerous and widespread of all those tools is his fantasy role playing game, Dungeons and Dragons.
Just goes to show that this Chick character hasn't even studied the business... I wonder how he would react if he saw Vampire: The Masquerade?
Oh and Cjais...the point you made by switching "Qur'an" with "Bible" is moot.
Not at all. He wasn't trying to disprove Chick. He was trying to make a point about Christianity.
Show me the documentation before you say that. Post a link to something that confirms that.
He's saying that there was no census. Asking him to prove this is asking him to prove the negative, which, by the rules of logic, cannot be done. (And as a note on the side: Do you really expect the Romans to write in some record: "We are not going to make a census today?")
Matthew hogwash: Which part of translation did you miss out?
The guy who portrayed the Christian did it well, however. When it came the time to minister to someone, he did it.
It is in response to this kind of post that I usually quote such institutions as the Inquisition, the KKK, the Crusades, ect...
Originally posted by ShadowTemplar
Not at all. He wasn't trying to disprove Chick. He was trying to make a point about Christianity.
Ya I got that...but now I forgot what I was supposed to say. :o
Oh well. I'll just improvise :D
Chick?! Is that his real name? Jack Chick?!?! :confused:
He must have had a troublesome childhood. That explains *a lot*.
Hm. Why does the subject of the evils of Christianity still creep in to this topic, even when the Christians here can clearly tell you that this guy is a lunatic?
He's a prime example of Christianity.
Uh-uh. I don't think so.
I find the fact that we're talking about a census in the Bible in a topic about Jack Chick amusing as well. :p I will only say one thing about the issue, referring to this:
I could go on all day about them, but that would be a mute point, since one false piece of it disproves the rest....
An author made a mistake in recording the date of something that he didn't witness, and you say that disproves the entirety of the account, as well as the sixty-five other accounts made by different authors that have been compiled in the Bible? (Actually, I don't recall if Luke even knew Jesus; I know most of the stuff in his Gospel is a compilment of his friends' accounts. His primary thing was writing the book of Acts, so his Gospel to him would have been like a "prequel". In case you're wondering, yes the other Gospel writers witnessed most of what they wrote about)
Reborn Outcast, here's your information:
http://www.kchanson.com/PTJ/census.html) > the census (yes, it existed, the argument is that it was sent several years before Luke said it was)
http://blue.butler.edu/~jfmcgrat/jesus/quirinius.htm) > the argument presented in full
http://users.rcn.com/tlclcms/census.html) > reiteration of part of the above plus census info/explanation
This is really a whole nuther debate...isn't it?
Nice link there Redwing, about how it is hard to read two stories that tell of the birth of Jesus, and neither of them agree. I was just using the Jack Chick way of making the Koran not accurate due to one minor historical mistake, and applying it to the Bible.
Can I ask a simple question: With the nativity, why is this scene usually one of Jesus as a very young baby, not as that of a 2 year old, as he is by the time the 3 Magi arrive? Who's version of his birth is being used, since neither seem to explain it clearly. Why is the supposed most important event unable to be explained by his closest followers the same way?
Here is an interesting link trying to work out who Jesus was as a human. It also states in regards to the census, and when one was taken in that region. Potentially the dates are wrong by approx 30 years in the Bible, but match up. (It is usually given that approx 4-6 years are unknown/unacconted for around the time of the birth of Jesus - not all the historical texts agree with everything there I assume)
Nemrut Dag - Jesus as a human (
http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi800.htm)
Originally posted by BCanr2d2
[BCan I ask a simple question: With the nativity, why is this scene usually one of Jesus as a very young baby, not as that of a 2 year old, as he is by the time the 3 Magi arrive?[/B]
Where do you get that he's 2 years old when they arrive?
Pretty simple - Herod makes a decree to kill all male children under 2 years old, so Herod has no idea as to how old he is, so Jesus is at oldest 2 when they arrive. It's not like they could've jumped in a car and got there quickly. Since no dates are given, logical deduction of events described in the Bible have to be used.
In Matthews Gospel, this is how it seems to be descirbed, when using the information from the link provided by redwing
http://blue.butler.edu/~jfmcgrat/jesus/quirinius.htm)
As to when the Magi arrived in Bethlehem, if we assume that Herod the Great is the person mentioned, and not his son, then it can all get historically messy!! His son was not King, since it was by then a Roman province, not the case in Herod The Greats time..
But then again, it depends on which of the two texts we use as being accurate......
Can I ask a simple question: With the nativity, why is this scene usually one of Jesus as a very young baby, not as that of a 2 year old, as he is by the time the 3 Magi arrive?
You'll have to ask the guys who made the Jesus figurines. :D
I agree with you.
I know of this Jack Chick dude only because I'm interested in roleplaying (pen 'n paper, the real deal), and he is one of the ongoing jokes in that community. Why? Because he thinks roleplaying is satanic.
He can't tell fiction from non-fiction. What about that Harry Potter crowd hey? :D
I was damn near falling off my chair laughing while reading this bullsh*t he's now made.
What do you think of this?
I don't see what's funny about that cartoon. Its like he's never spoken to a Muslim in his life. I would say that he should do his research first. Again, what is the joke that I'm missing. Get rid of your double standards dude.
Why do you judge me by the actions of televangelists and those guys that write stuff like that?
*There is no minimum to buy etc etc, have your credit card ready etc etc, when you become a Christian all of your possessions belong to God, that includes your money, so please give me your money etc etc, you can never give me enough etc etc* I don't have a half an hour televangelist 5:30am slot so I can run infocommercials on for half of it.
I have never even met him. Wouldn't it be wrong to do the same to Muslims as well [judging them by Osama]? I'm sure you wouldn't laugh at that. :rolleyes:
EDIT: As an aside with the Jesus figurines, if you interpret this passage as referring to Jesus [read on at
www.biblegateway.com) for the rest of the chapter] then it is likely that Jesus has nothing that would physically attract you to Him. Unlike all of the pictures which show smooth silky skin, a trimmed beard and wide open eyes. I dislike all of those pictures which non-Christians mock Christians for. So please don't talk about Christians in general, talk about televangelists and things like that specifically.
The blonde man creationalist thing was a shocker, talk about subliminal advertising, thats what it is. Also, you see these televangists they start out soft then gradually get louder and put on an act. Did you know thats the same tactics Hitler used to whip crowds in a frenzy? Saddening. :(
Isaiah 53
1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Originally posted by FunClown
Again, what is the joke that I'm missing. Get rid of your double standards dude.
The joke is that he's terrifyingly ignorant and believes in his own lies so much it has become his reality. The guy is a nutcase. He's mentally ill, if you judge him based on his views expressed on that page. I'm not kidding - he has attached himself from reality, and is now living in a fantasy world where rock music is satanic, where D&D is an occult ritual and where Jesus is The Saviour.
You're right. It's not really funny. But I can't stop laughing at ignorance like that. And no, it's not just him - I laugh at ignorant Muslims as well, particularily Bin Laden because he obviously believes that what he does will bring good to the world. His fantasy world.
Where is my double standards evident in this?
I'd f*ckin' laugh my behind off if I met a person as delirious as this in my neighboorhood. And I'd recommend psychiatric treatment to at least help him communicate with the real world better.
And I have no sympathy for those who choose to live in a world of their own lies - C'jais
The double standards I was getting at was laughing at stupidity like that because its branded Christianity. But you cleared that up in your last post. :)
Originally posted by Redwing
Hm. Why does the subject of the evils of Christianity still creep in to this topic, even when the Christians here can clearly tell you that this guy is a lunatic?
Because most people have a far too rosy picture of Christianity, for which there is no historical or present basis.
Originally posted by Redwing
Uh-uh. I don't think so.
Crossref: Inquisition, Crusade, KKK, North Ireland, ect.
Originally posted by Redwing
I find the fact that we're talking about a census in the Bible in a topic about Jack Chick amusing as well. :p I will only say one thing about the issue, referring to this:
An author made a mistake in recording the date of something that he didn't witness, and you say that disproves the entirety of the account, as well as the sixty-five other accounts made by different authors that have been compiled in the Bible?
No. It disproves that it is infallible, which some (many) Christians seem to think. It disproves that it is the Word of God, which some (many) Christians seem to think. Or that God chose to lie to Humanity. Your pick.
Why is the supposed most important event unable to be explained by his closest followers the same way?
Because Paulus wrote and edited the Bible several decades after the actual events (read The Dead Sea Scroll Deciet).
The blonde man creationalist thing was a shocker, talk about subliminal advertising, thats what it is. Also, you see these televangists they start out soft then gradually get louder and put on an act. Did you know thats the same tactics Hitler used to whip crowds in a frenzy? Saddening.
Same tactic that the priest uses at church too, I might add.
Can I ask a simple question: With the nativity, why is this scene usually one of Jesus as a very young baby, not as that of a 2 year old, as he is by the time the 3 Magi arrive? Who's version of his birth is being used, since neither seem to explain it clearly.
My Nativity scene has three dudes dressed like pimps, an Ol' Joseph action figure, a topless Mary performing a donkey show, and Baby Jesus with an enormous erection. Oh, and various farm animals. And hay and stuff.
So, who's version is that?
Gonna skip past alot of responses, but here's my little say
the Dungeons and Dragons (the actual game) does have several satanic involvments (worship your "god" or "demon", call to it for help, blood sacrifice in-game, etc). It caused alot of people playing to lose concept of reality. People have killed over it, including themselves. I remember one isntance where 2 brother played it alot. The brother that was the Dungeon Master told his other brother to shoot him with a shotgun, to prove ti others it couldn't harm him.
However, when it comes to RPGs like, eh... Dark Age of Camelot, EverQuest, Anarchy Online, or even a few board games... though some of it may have a satanic background (magic), I am mature enough to not let some stupid game alter my concept of reality. To me, EverQuest is a game, I play for fun. I don't start worshipping Tunare.
I have never played board RPG games though, because many are dangerous (proven), and I just don't think it's worth the risk.
btw, do some research on Allah... he is what they said
"And Cjais yes he is right about Islam... Allah is depicted 'as a severe judge and is not depicted as loving.' "
that is correct, and not by a Christian source.
Originally posted by RpTheHotrod
the Dungeons and Dragons (the actual game) does have several satanic involvments (worship your "god" or "demon", call to it for help, blood sacrifice in-game, etc).
That's called a "game". People playing these games can distinguish between a fantasy world and the real one. Praying to Pelor the sun god is only acting in character - and this is encouraged. If you seriously think the people that play these games cannot make the distinction between their made-up characters and their own person, I'm really stunned beyond belief.
Hvae you ever tried playing these games yourself? RPG's require you to think abstractly, promote teamwork and helps build up empathy (such as playing a character you would never sympathise with in reality).
It caused alot of people playing to lose concept of reality.
No, these people detached from reality before they started playing. It's the same story with Doom etc - it all boils down to that those people would have commited crimes regardless.
And those people who do flip out and kill somebody are the extreme minority. Why should these rare cases the rest of us to enjoy RPG's? By the same token, I could say the exact same about the movie and religion industry - a few bad examples does not label the rest of the customers as unhealthy.
Originally posted by RpTheHotrod
btw, do some research on Allah... he is what they said
"And Cjais yes he is right about Islam... Allah is depicted 'as a severe judge and is not depicted as loving.' "
that is correct, and not by a Christian source.
Have actually you read the Koran?
Sure, I'll play along and call Allah a "severe judge". But so is the Christian one. I'm thinking you should read up on your Bible a bit better.
Yep, the Christian one is also a judge. A Just Judge that does love his people.
Here's an example for ya
http://www.digitracts.com/digitracts/forgiven.asp)
btw, most RPGs that people lose their concept of reality (and if you say it's untrue, you have NOT done research in D&D. I can pull up some stuff on it when I get home if you wish) are just components on excercising something that causes them to start "going weird".
Yes, hundreds of people have died due to the D&D game. That's why it's so controversial now.
Originally posted by RpTheHotrod
Yep, the Christian one is also a judge. A Just Judge that does love his people.
A grotesque God that kills innocent women and children for not believing in him.
btw, most RPGs that people lose their concept of reality (and if you say it's untrue, you have NOT done research in D&D.
Dude. I play D&D. While I'm starting to feel certain you'll label me a satanic worshipper, I do function just fine in society. Once again, the "hundreds" of people the die because of this were already so mentally ill they'd end up in harm sooner or later. Just like the PC game "Doom".
And the minority (and it truly is an insignificant minority, no matter what your websites will tell you) does not make the rest of us mad. Just as I won't go out and kill someone after watching "Psycho", but one in a million might. That doesn't mean the movie affected the rest of us. It means there was something wrong with the person who did.
Never said D&D players are satanists (there you go again, putting words in other people's mouth)...I said it does have some satanic stuff in it.
"A grotesque God that kills innocent women and children for not believing in him."
God doesn't kill people for unbelieving. He gives everyone free will. However, sin does have a penalty, and THAT'S why people get...punished.
Originally posted by RpTheHotrod
Never said D&D players are satanists (there you go again, putting words in other people's mouth)...I said it does have some satanic stuff in it.
Where? I've been into D&D as a hobby since I was 12. From my own point of view, it's merely a creative game.
God doesn't kill people for unbelieving. He gives everyone free will. However, sin does have a penalty, and THAT'S why people get...punished.
In life as well? I'm just taking this from the old testament. I don't if it's the standardized issue of the Bible, though.
Originally posted by C'jais
Sure, I'll play along and call Allah a "severe judge". But so is the Christian one. I'm thinking you should read up on your Bible a bit better.
Umm C'jais were'nt you the one that told me that you had only read a couple of versus in the Bible, specifically Genesis Chapter 1. All your other info you're getting is from that skeptics website that tries to show that the whole Bible is a contradiciton.
Very true.
Also, I have done alot of research in the occult, and there are several things in the D&D game that does have satanic backgrounds and rituals. You're "just a player", I'm someone who knows the big picture. If I can find my book I wrote in about it, I can post it if you want.