HOME | DD

Published: 2005-12-29 21:33:21 +0000 UTC; Views: 2853; Favourites: 21; Downloads: 382
Redirect to original
Description
Thomas Paine has been credited with sparking the American Reviolution with his book "Common Sense", which makes him one of our founding fathers.After I read this quote, I thought to myself, "I never thought of it like that before!" If god impregnated Mary, who was at the time engaged to be married to Joseph, than god himself broke one of his own commandments (thou shall not covet thine neighbors wife) or maybe there was a loophole because they weren't married yet. Anyway you look at it, god committed adultery when he knocked up Mary, and Joseph (whether he believed god did it or not) was forced to raise a bastard child out of love for Mary. Drama, man. Drama.
Related content
Comments: 32
t-subgenius [2012-01-04 00:20:11 +0000 UTC]
I always just was annoyed at the whole human sacrifice in the New Testament; I never had considered the fact that it was all started by basic debauchery! Thanks for posting, now I need to go reread Age of Reason as it obviously has been too long.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SrVnDaNK In reply to t-subgenius [2012-01-04 18:09:46 +0000 UTC]
Stay fresh with the Age of Reason!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
dancecommanderx [2009-07-19 09:12:06 +0000 UTC]
Watch the movie Religulous.
Its got so much dirt on religions.
You'll be shocked at the end.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SrVnDaNK In reply to dancecommanderx [2009-07-20 15:51:01 +0000 UTC]
Seen it. Loved it. Thanks.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
SnowWhiteCyanide [2006-12-27 07:23:21 +0000 UTC]
The bible also says that bats are birds and that insects have four legs.
It also says that mohawks, tattoos, cotton-polyester and mules are all sins against god.
It's in leviticus
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SnowWhiteCyanide In reply to SrVnDaNK [2006-12-27 17:58:47 +0000 UTC]
Haha, it's true! Last year I volunteered at a church, and after I finished my James Patterson novel, I read the bible for shits and giggles.
Leviticus 19:19
Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender
with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.
That's right, the bible says you can't wear clothing woven of two different fibers. If it's not 100% the touch, the feel of cotton... it's a sin.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SrVnDaNK In reply to SnowWhiteCyanide [2006-12-27 18:07:19 +0000 UTC]
Wierd....
Thanks for commenting! I hope you have a happy New Year.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Ernesto-Che-Guevara [2006-03-01 09:43:11 +0000 UTC]
Thomas Paine is THE man. This summer I am going to his Museum in New Rochelle NY, to pay respects to a few of his body parts they put in his bust on that site. The only thing stranger then the life of Tom was the afterlife that his body traveled!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SrVnDaNK In reply to Ernesto-Che-Guevara [2006-03-01 13:46:53 +0000 UTC]
Dude, read my essay "The Current State of the Union, and How History Repeats Itself" I think you'll like it. You'll find it in my gallery.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
steward [2005-12-31 18:26:00 +0000 UTC]
Whether or not she were still a virgin (and maybe you should look at how terms were translated from the Gk.; the word translated as "virgin" was synonymous with "young woman"), she bore a child which was not from her betrothed husband. Under Hebraic law (oh, gee, guess you should read the bOOK again, especially the five sections referred to by Christians as the Pentateuch and by Jews as the Torah), this was an action of depraved morals - that is, debauchery.
Of course, Yahweh didn't breach morals directly, being a deity; his laws would not apply to himself. He simply invited Mary to breach her morals...
Maybe that's why the kid came up with a prayer, according to the bOOOOOK, which asks Yahweh not to lead people into temptation, but to deliver them from evil - because Yahweh's the kind of deity that would do things like that, if he weren't asked otherwise.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SrVnDaNK In reply to steward [2005-12-31 20:12:13 +0000 UTC]
Wow. Another good point! Thanks for commenting.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
steward [2005-12-31 18:17:54 +0000 UTC]
If you liked the quote, you'll love the whole book. Available for free on the Internet in HTML format at http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/thomas_paine/age_of_reason/index.html .
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
rekklez [2005-12-31 01:35:50 +0000 UTC]
lol! how would it be debauchery if she is still a virgin? Joseph would have nothing to be jealous of and nobody's morals were corrupted. I think Joseph, after being confused on the matter, was convinced that the child was of God when an angel appeared to him. That'd probably do it for me too. Perhaps you and Mr. Paine should get together and read the Book again to better understand what's going on???
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SrVnDaNK In reply to rekklez [2005-12-31 05:55:04 +0000 UTC]
Good point. I like making WPs that spark conversation. Thanks for commenting, and happy New Year!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
KaiserTwig [2005-12-30 08:43:48 +0000 UTC]
Not a Christain, but damn this is funny crap. Then again, my Baptist wife would play the "but, he's God" card.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SrVnDaNK In reply to KaiserTwig [2005-12-30 15:00:24 +0000 UTC]
Exactly. He's like Bush, above the law.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
AsaGreen [2005-12-30 07:21:04 +0000 UTC]
At the birth of Christianity, the older gods had behaved thusly, so I doubt that was considered as extraordinary an idea. The Romans had them beat on fun holidays, so the early Christians needed a good story. I bet the converted missed the old Bacchanalia.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SrVnDaNK In reply to AsaGreen [2005-12-30 15:04:04 +0000 UTC]
Heh, no shit. I heard actually that this "immaculate conception" story was stolen from an ancient pegan god story.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
SrVnDaNK In reply to ozzybozz [2005-12-30 00:17:13 +0000 UTC]
Isn't it? It adds a new perspective to the immaculate conception.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
steward In reply to SrVnDaNK [2005-12-31 18:14:49 +0000 UTC]
Not that I disagree with your deviation, but just a technical point: The "Immaculate Conception" is a Roman Catholic belief that Mary, when she was conceived - that is, before she was born - was free of the taint of "original sin", that she had as pure a soul as Adam and Eve. It doesn't refer to the conception of Jesus.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ozzybozz In reply to SrVnDaNK [2005-12-30 01:15:31 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, most definitely. I was on the phone with my friend when I saw it in my watch. I read it to him and he got a good laugh out of it
👍: 0 ⏩: 1