John Connor in Tehran Times

and many already know this. George W. Bush is a Satanist and an antichrist
Click to expand...

"an" antichrist? There's more than one now? Did Satan start franchising, like Krusty the Clown did?
 
Horatius said:
"an" antichrist? There's more than one now? Did Satan start franchising, like Krusty the Clown did?
Click to expand...
What's one of the seven deadly sins? Sloth.
What's another name for sloth? Laziness.
What do lazy bosses do? Delegate.

Of course Satan franchises! You don't think every fat dude in a red suit is the real Satan, do you?!?
 
chipmunk stew said:
What's one of the seven deadly sins? Sloth.
What's another name for sloth? Laziness.
What do lazy bosses do? Delegate.

Of course Satan franchises! You don't think every fat dude in a red suit is the real Satan, do you?!?
Click to expand...

Okay, you've convinced me. John Conner knows the truth, and 9/11 was an inside job!

Are you happy now?


:p
 
Satanism is the belief that one is their own god
Click to expand...
I thought that these few words were especially indicative of his ignorance.

ETA: Is the readership of the Tehran Times likely to be sympathetic to his literalist Bible interpretations?
 
Last edited:
CurtC said:
I thought that these few words were especially indicative of his ignorance.
Click to expand...
Meh. It's artist license. I'm sure no one would object if I characterized Christianity thus:

Christianity is the belief that Jesus Christ is the son of a dog.
 
Well if he does any touring over in Iran for his latest essay, I hope he realizes if he gaucks at the women over there like he does over here, he'll lose his hands and maybe something else...lol

TAM
 
At least he makes some terrorists laugh if they read the news...
But he´s too fainthearted to show himself without sunglasses...
(I guess the NWO is chasing him) :rolleyes:
 
They've got a thread about this over at LC.

I love this comment:

It's not a bad article, but it generates some confusion by crossing LaVayan Satanism with Luciferianism, as well as galloping along quite quickly to its conclusion at the end. It gives them holes to say, "This is unrelated.", or, "This cannot be the case, because x is misrepresented here."

The average reader might not notice it, but those things can cause big problems when it comes to floating the article as credible.
Click to expand...


Translation: you shouldn't go making **** up, because they might hold it against us, not because it wrong or anything......Really commited to the truth, there, guys.
 
Horatius said:
"an" antichrist? There's more than one now? Did Satan start franchising, like Krusty the Clown did?
Click to expand...
Well, the Bible itself uses "antichrists" in plural. The term only appear five times, four in 2 John and once in 3 John, one of them plural, and never does it imply that it is only one specific person, rather a trait of several.

Then again, many fundiegelicals don't know their Bible that well, either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom