Potential Twitter Mate

28 posts / 0 new
Last post
Potential Twitter Mate

So this bloke’s got in touch with me on Twitter wanting to be my twitter-mate. His bio reads “All persons who do not enjoy the goodness and mercy of God become the target of God's justice.”

If I didn’t know better I’d think that was intended as a threat. God’s justice? Satan killed 10 people in the Bible, the 7 sons and 3 daughters of Job. Actually you can probably give Satan a higher score than that. You can probably chalk up another 50 bodies because he also killed all of Job’s slaves, and as Job was pretty minted he’d more than likely have about 50 slaves.

But God killed 2,476,636. The Bible bashers don’t tell you that do they? I mean, they tell you about a few of God’s killings, those that can be retold (with considerable dishonesty) into cute children’s stories - Noah’s flood, David & Goliath, the walls of Jericho etc. so kids can sing songs about them, but they don’t really expand on His killings.

And these figures don’t even include killings that God instructed others to do, those that while he may not have taken an active role met with his approval (David, for instance, buying his first wife with 200 Philistine foreskins) or of course those killings that we’re told about but which numbers have to be estimated because we don’t know the exact figure.

For instance we know God burned to death 250 blokes for burning joss sticks (Numbers 16:35), but we don’t know how many he drowned in the flood, or how many he burned to death in Sodom & Gomorrah, or how many first born Egyptian children he killed.

Well, I found a bloke who’d worked it out by using estimates from the Atlas of World Population History. This fellow came up with a grand total of 24,634,205 people who God killed.

So the score at the end of play is Satan 60, God 24.5 million.

Strange how the perspective changes with the point of view, isn’t it? Most people who claim to believe in the Bible don’t actually know what’s in it.

Does he want to be your friend, or does he want to mate with you? BTW, I guess that's why the Americans reckon they have God on their side.

 

How many foreskins would get me a wife these days?
How about sheepskins?
Sheeps skins might do it, but only the front end.

 

Or horse skins! (mind you, a horse's foreskin miht get you a haram)

 

Might! Might with a 'G'

 

What would I do with a harem Karl? Or will God strike me dead?
Is a harem haram, or is it allowed?

 

Luigi, it's just one of those days. I can't even smell my own name.

 

Karl, I wasn't querying your spelling. Haram, I understand, is an Arabic term which means forbidden. I was being facetious and making a pun on the two words asking whether a harem is forbidden or allowed.

 

Both, probably, depending on the point of view. Deuteronomy 22.30 states, “A man shall not take his father's wife, nor discover his father's skirt” I can go along with the first bit. It’s probably nothing to do with incest at all. More that a young man isn’t allowed to sleep with any of the women in his father’s harem. But it’s the second bit tha confuses me a little when it talks about not discovering his father’s skirt. I’m assuming he’s not to catch the old boy wearing panty-hose and a bra either? But why does the Bible talk about cross-dressing at all? I’m sure his father leads a very active social life, but what’s that got to do with Christianity?

 

Looks like it was a mistake. I suppose they mean shirt, but seeing as it was written at half-ten perhaps the scribe was tired, or maybe just back from a session down the pub.

 

Are they trying to skirt the issue?

 

There are different versions of this. One says, “A man must not marry a woman who was married to his father. This would be a disgrace to his father.” I bet it would! Another says, “A man shall not take his father's former wife, nor shall he uncover her who belongs to his father.” In other words the ‘skirt’ is his father’s wife, as in ‘A bit of skirt’ I suppose. Deuteronomy (the 10 commandments chapter) is full of great stuff. How about this one; “A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this.” Deuteronomy 22:5 Or how about this; “If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity. If the charge is true and no proof of the girl's virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death.” Bloody hell! That’s a bit harsh, isn’t it? Here’s another one; “If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, .he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.” Not only is it bad enough that she’s raped (which God actually condones in later chapters) but now she’s got to marry the bastard and spend the rest of her life with him!!

 

Just like the last description, in Sicily until fairly recently if a man wanted to marry a reluctant woman he would rape her and then had to marry her to restore her honour. In 1965 an 18 year-old girl, Franca Viola, took the rapist to court and he was convicted. This was the first time that a woman showed courage to defy conventions. In the last two decades rape became an official crime written into the law.

 

Here's s song for you, Wiggsy. Your chap Deuteronomy is named therein :) --> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XSvsFgvWr0 http://www.ukauthors.com
Andrea, I'll take a look at this when I get home.

 

What this mate is perhaps suggesting is that those who acknowledge God do not require forgiveness for their sins as much as those who do not or cannot acknowledge Him, therefore they become self-made targets for enlightenment. If everyone was kind and loving, there wouldn't be much of a need for forgiveness, and that's why He's always there for those who sincerely ask for His help. No matter what a man or woman has done, God will always be there for them. The problem with hardcore religionists is that they say things in a way that puts people's backs up. because they believe in God so much, they forget about equality and generally despise those they see as weak when it was always God's will to help the weak and vulnerable. I dislike this trait intensely because, rather than showing me the way to God, their holier than thou know-it-all attitude compelled me to go it alone and look elsewhere, but I'm grateful for that now. The problem with atheists and agnostics is that they tend to blame the problems of the world on God, when it's always people and nature that do the harm. Mankind is the world's spiritual pondlife, more now than ever, so what has science really brought to the table of self-discovery? Nothing. To imagine that there is no universal spirit, no creative intelligence that guides us, that we are the inventors of our own destiny when we can't even control our emotions, is probably the most self-centred, boring aspect of mankind. In actual fact, the two types above are one and the same, because ego (and a skewed perception of their own intelligence) rules the minds and hearts of both.

 

Blighters, good points as always, although I'm not too sure I understand how an atheist or agnostic manages to blame the problems of the world on something he doesn't believe in! Kind of like me blaming a hangover on booze when I deny the existence of alcohol.

 

You could easily, as an atheist, blame the problems of the world on those who believe in God and Buddha and Allah as they seem to be causing most of the misery. Even capitalism which seems to be the curse brought on us by believers.
Hi Karl Hope you don't mind me having a playaround with your words. -An atheist or agnostic manages to blame the problems of the world on something he doesn't believe in because he doesn't believe in anything. -Kind of like me blaming a hangover on booze when I deny the existence of a problem. That was me for a very long time Hi Pia Baked beans in HP sauce is a concept invented by man, just as God, Buddha (I thought He was non-violent), Allah and capitalism were invented, presumably, for the common good, but this has failed abysmally and is now only in place to protect the few. The problem, as always, is people, not Gods. These icons are just smokescreens for the powerful to blind the masses. Wars and laws are invented by people in the business setting to separate and privatise; ethnic cleansing (lives), religious wars (land), economic wars (money), starvation (lives), poverty (money), government (power), apartheid (power) were all invented by people in the business setting to racially harm one another. All breed fear in the masses to do anything against the grain. Only revolution is a war with the integrity to set things straight. No Gods lifted a finger because we were given free will to fight for our freedom and sort out our problems for ourselves. Acts of nature are signs of our lack of learning, but will we ever embark on a new way? It might take a few more (real) wars but I hope so. (I just had an intrusion blocked by my security so I know someone somewhere doesn't want me to write this.)

 

If God and Allah (we'll leave out Buddha then) were invented for the common good why do they preach all the nasty things then that are in the Bible and the Koran (don't know how to spell that in english)?? Anyway humans are stupid fools and will never be peaceful towards each other no matter if there is a revolution or not. It's just not possible. I do not believe in any god and never will and I have very little faith in the survival of the human race. Nature is going to kill us all in the end because we are treating it so badly. Everyone is and will never grow wiser.
Hi Pia God and Allah don't preach; people do that, and some even abuse children when they're off the paraphet. these people hide behind religion to do evil. There again, there aren't many of them but they do give religion a terrible name. Most people in the world are lovely and there are only a few bad eggs in every batch. Problem is, they tend to be the ones in power and now we're all tarred with the same brush. It doesn't need to be this way but we just don't fight for what we believe in so we only have ourselves to blame.

 

K .. what happened to TwitFace. Did you hear from him again ?? Dx
Denni, I lose track of them, sweetheart. I need a secretary. I've only just started on Twitter - I never saw the point because you can only write about four words - but I've already got over 600 people following me. It's a bit like Linked In. Unlike Facebook, which I keep to a minimum of 50 people and then have a cull of all the people who's lives bore me or who I suspect of using Facebook to peek into my life without sharing anything of their own, I'm happy to connect with anyone on Linked In, UNLESS their profile says 'seeking new opportunities' (because I can't help them) or I suspect that by connecting with them I'm going to receive a phone call in the next 24 hours trying to sell me tower crane rescue courses (which I've already got) or some other new behavioural safety system. What gets me is people who say, "I believe in the Bible," and hae no idea what's in it. I'll email you privately about Twitter.

 

Blimey, there are an awful lot of Karl Wigginses on Twatter. However, UKA are now following you (whatever that means), assuming I have the write Karl (pun intended). As for the god thang, I'm with Pia :) http://www.ukauthors.com
and I'm with Andrea and Dylan-who's the Persecutor indeed- but I believe he changed his mind later on.