ashan316 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

ITs funny! he is th ebest!

shadon007 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Dude I just peed a little after reading this. I'm gonna print out your comment and show it to the world!

ninjamaster102 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Well, what defines "shouting out loud?" talking to someone after the incident is what comes to mind here. And disrespecting the parents? What defines "disrespecting?" I think it's time that you spent some time with the Bible before brandishing your arguments and opinions on the internet my friend. And guess who hasn't read the Bible and yet still tries to bring Christianity down?BIG HINT: It's you buddy :)

brokenscimitar (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Christianity: the belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him that you accept him as your master, so that he can remove from your soul an evil force that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

CptSunbeam (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Think about this (unless you don't like thinking). Only a sick, sick, woman-hating God would permit rape as long as she doesn't shout out loud. Under such a law system all the rapist would need to do is gag her. Only a sick, twisted God would stone someone for giving cheek to their parents. However, I don't expect you to agree with me, since scripture-apologists expend great energy trying to justify obscene miscarriages of justice. I think it's time to reevaluate your moral code my friend.

CptSunbeam (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

You're a typical apologist, who thinks that it's possible to justify God's commands to slice babies in two and spread dung in people's faces. I have a bombshell for you. It is not possible. There is no defense for such scriptures and there never will be. Neither should you try to defend them. There is no correct context for rape and genocide. Ever.Note: someone else had to point out these verses for you. I think there's no question about who's actually read the book. Hint: It's not you.

residualbill (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Well damn, then who did I just give my money to? ;)LOLPeace be with you o' fellow Youtubian.

blackhawk777 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

rofl, look at all these people copying and pasting their bible verses. this aint sunday morning church. this is youtube.

ninjamaster102 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Did I say that the murder of disrespectful children is warranted? No, I did not. Yet again you take what is being said out of context. I also do not see where in the same passage that it mentions adulterers, homosexuals and Sabbath Workers. I do not support your second statement, as these were used in times when situations best fitted the time and place. Once again you seem to be taking this passage out of context.

catalyst8 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Then you agree that the murder of disrespectful children is warranted. As for your quote from Deuteronomy, the modern translations continue to differ more & more with the Tanakh original which, as well as ordering the murder of rape victims who don't shout loudly enough to be heard, also insists that adulterers, homosexuals, Sabbath workers,etc. are murdered.If the Arab god of Judaism/Christianity/Islam was infallible then these barbaric & murderous laws should apply today. You support this?