Oj bit the big one

raggie33

*the raggedier*
Joined
Aug 11, 2003
Messages
13,753
He is a bit before my time I'm older dontbrecall his first work. In one movie he was a cop it was a comedy and he was trying to catch falling babies. But he got excited after catching the last one he almost spiked it lol
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
20,400
Location
NYC
Ephesians 4:32

Fermenting hate; can't stand when I do that.
Cowardly murderers should be hated, and dealt with accordingly. The fact that he was not only NOT executed in a speedy manner, but actually found not-guilty by 12 idiots too stupid to get out of jury duty; highlights the fact that America has become FAR too tolerant of truly obscene, violent behavior.

Also, having read the Holy Bible years ago, I know that quote from Ephesians has literally nothing to do with hatred towards violently murderous individuals.
 

LRJ88

Enlightened
Joined
May 4, 2014
Messages
652
Well, i for one am not quite keen on the bible and using it as any kind of moral foundation:
Deuteronomy 20:16-17

"However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you."
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
20,400
Location
NYC
Now you're getting all old covenant on us. Much worse than that back then.

How fortunate we are that Monocrom (and others?) know the truth, and so confidently bestow their riches on us.
Not at all. I simply know you took that quote from Ephesians out of context. And, as a fellow Christian (who admittedly comes up short sometimes and needs to work on that), sorry; couldn't let that slide.

Isolated quotes here and there in The Holy Bible.... Those were used in America before the start of the Civil war to justify the existence of Slavery. The Good Book needs to be taken as a whole, without isolated sections here and there used to make one's point. No malice from me to you. I hope you realize that.
 

LRJ88

Enlightened
Joined
May 4, 2014
Messages
652
Now you're getting all old covenant on us. Much worse than that back then.

How fortunate we are that Monocrom (and others?) know the truth, and so confidently bestow their riches on us.
"Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a person's enemies will be those of his own household. Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it."

I can go newer, but when it comes to this you can't have the new without the old, and regardless of how you look at these things it's very, VERY hard for me to look at it and not see all the signs of the majority of sects permeating so much of it, even after it being edited, translated, changed to be part of an omnibus and so on.
 

Hooked on Fenix

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
3,172
Well, i for one am not quite keen on the bible and using it as any kind of moral foundation:
Deuteronomy 20:16-17

"However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you."
Nearly all of these were the descendants of Canaan (Genesis 10). They were responsible for all that happened at Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18-19), trying to rape Abraham's wife Sarah (Genesis 20), and raping Jacob's daughter Dinah (Genesis 34). Brother to Canaan was Cush, whose son was Nimrod (created original "Mother Earth" religion at Tower of Babel to get people to worship the creation instead of the creator), who built Nineveh, a city that flayed people alive. God sent Jonah there to get them to repent (book of Jonah) However, after over 100 years later, the next generation was just as wicked as before and God destroyed the city (book of Obadiah). So yes, the people that were flaying people alive, raping everyone in sight, robing them, beating them, then leaving them to starve to death without letting them leave the city (in Apocrypha books referring to Sodom) deserved to be wiped out to keep them from killing, raping, and robbing everybody else. The reason Israel can't live in peace today is they didn't finish the job wiping out these violent and immoral people back then and now constantly has to deal with them today.
 

LRJ88

Enlightened
Joined
May 4, 2014
Messages
652
Nearly all of these were the descendants of Canaan (Genesis 10). They were responsible for all that happened at Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18-19), trying to rape Abraham's wife Sarah (Genesis 20), and raping Jacob's daughter Dinah (Genesis 34). Brother to Canaan was Cush, whose son was Nimrod (created original "Mother Earth" religion at Tower of Babel to get people to worship the creation instead of the creator), who built Nineveh, a city that flayed people alive. God sent Jonah there to get them to repent (book of Jonah) However, after over 100 years later, the next generation was just as wicked as before and God destroyed the city (book of Obadiah). So yes, the people that were flaying people alive, raping everyone in sight, robing them, beating them, then leaving them to starve to death without letting them leave the city (in Apocrypha books referring to Sodom) deserved to be wiped out to keep them from killing, raping, and robbing everybody else. The reason Israel can't live in peace today is they didn't finish the job wiping out these violent and immoral people back then and now constantly has to deal with them today.
I don't fail to see the hypocrisy arising from this considering that the response to this group of people was killing them, and not just them but others as well. Isn't it pretty odd that you have one group of people, the one we follow, who always seem to be doing god's work and doing the right thing, and this group of people for some reason being told to genocide others? The same group of people who had laws condoning slavery and telling you how to make a fellow jew into a slave? That every other group not in their group was evil to an absurd degree?

Just to bring up what happened with Sodom and Gomorrah, because this part makes zero sense to me, what happened when the angels enter the home of Lot and all the people of Sodom surrounded their home? They told him to bring out his visitors, that they may have sexual relations with them. What did Lot say then? Did he believe the angels to actually be able to hold their own? Did he barricade the door, sure that it would keep them safe for a while longer? No, the ******* offered his virgin daughters to them in place of the angels, to be raped by the people there. Did the angels tell him to do so? Were the angels in any danger? Could the angels, had they wanted, have taken that responsibility onto themselves and made the people buzz off? The angels could easily lead them out of the city after this, that they may flee to another village and be safe from the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, so why not be proactive?

The entire thing reads like an incomplete fictional narrative where you're expected to sympathise with someone because the other side is portrayed as being so much worse, but if i was in a situation where i had two divine beings, beings of untold power, came into my home and the rest of my town came and told me they wanted to bum my guests and were starting to get violent about it i wouldn't offer up my daughters, i wouldn't offer up anyone else for it. Apologetics in the bible leave a very vile taste in my mouth.
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
20,400
Location
NYC
Just a bit of clarification:

From my reading of The Holy Bible, it seemed as though Lot was not actually aware who his guests were, when his home was surrounded by the mob of violent, deranged perverts.

Second...... Bare with me here, I know this will sound like a bizarre AND very alien concept but...... Lot offering up his daughters to the mob, would not seem bizarre at all to anyone from the Middle East reading that tale. If you invite someone into your home, your guest becomes the most precious and important thing in your Life while they are at your home. So much so that you do not let anything happen to your guest! Horrendous mob outside your home demanding you bring your guest out to them? Oh Hell no! You keep your guest safe no matter what!

Even to this day in many Middle Eastern nations, this custom continues to exist. Yes, it's bizarre, even deranged; and if I had daughters there's no way in Hell I'm sending them out there! Being this is America, that mob is going to see the end of my rifle pointed at them. If they're lucky, the end of one of my 16oz. "Crowd Pleaser" canisters (plural) of pepperspray. They're getting something flying in their general direction one way or the other. But, I was born in Eastern Europe; not the Middle East.
 
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
10,503
Location
Pacific N.W.
... but actually found not-guilty by 12 idiots too stupid to get out of jury duty; highlights the fact that America has become FAR too tolerant of truly obscene, violent behavior.
I believe most of the jurors voted to acquit due to their fear of the massive violence that surely would have followed a guilty verdict. :aaa:

History proved they merely delayed the violence.
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
20,400
Location
NYC
I believe most of the jurors voted to acquit due to their fear of the massive violence that surely would have followed a guilty verdict. :aaa:

History proved they merely delayed the violence.
Knew he was guilty but voted otherwise due to fear and hoping to avoid mass riots.... Unfortunately, I have to agree that THAT makes a lot of sense. But as you pointed out, a foolish and futile effort on their part.
 

three_jeeps

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Aug 21, 2023
Messages
8
Location
USA
At the time, all the news sources were commenting on how it was almost impossible for a African American to get a fair trial. Truth and justice don't always coincide. I find it hard to believe that the jury would consider the possibility of riots in arriving at their verdict.
I personally hope he rots in hell....
 

vincent3685

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Mar 14, 2015
Messages
144
I believe most of the jurors voted to acquit due to their fear of the massive violence that surely would have followed a guilty verdict. :aaa:

History proved they merely delayed the violence.
Uh, No. One of the jurors just came out saying she, and 90% of her fellow jurors, treated the verdict as direct revenge against what happened to Rodney King. It amounted to jury nullification. IOW, they were all racists looking to settle a score.

The predictable violent responses we see nowadays is a direct result of an inability to properly resolve disputes among your peers. It's inevitably what happens when there are no male role models in the home and young boys are raised by hysterical, emotional single mothers.
 

Hooked on Fenix

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
3,172
LRJ88

You seem to have a warped and twisted view of the Bible so let's get two things straight.

1. Just because it's in the Bible does not mean it is behavior condoned or endorsed by the Bible. Slavery is not endorsed by the Bible. When Moses commanded slaves to be freed in the seventh year (Deuteronomy 15:12-18), he took slavery that lasted for life down to indentured servitude. Slavery already existed. This was the first step toward the boss and employee relationship we have today. If you read the Book of Philemon, it is about an escaped slave of a Christian whom the apostle Paul sends back with the letter asking him to be kind to the slave and free him, treating him as a brother. This letter helped end slavery in the Roman Empire. Before that, they didn't even consider slavery as wrong.

The Bible doesn't endorse divorce. Divorce was starting to occur frequently during the time of Moses. All a man had to say was, "I divorce you" three times to the wife and they'd be considered divorced. However, then the woman would have no financial support and if she tried to get with another man, she'd be found guilty of cheating on her husband, the penalty is stoning to death. What Moses did is tell the men that if they divorce their wives, they need to give them a certificate of divorce to prove the woman did not commit adultery, keeping her safe from stoning and allowing her to remarry. (Deuteronomy 22, 24)

Jesus said, "You have heard it said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'" (Matthew 5:38) This was not him suggesting violence. He was quoting the Code of Hammurabi comparing what the world's idea of justice said vs. what Jesus wanted people to do (show love to your enemies).

2. Just because there are hypocrites in the Bible does not mean it's not the legitimate inspired (God breathed) Word of God. If it was a history book written by humans, you would never know about their character flaws and failures. The author(s) would be too embarrassed to be honest and tell you these things and be remembered by their mistakes for all time. But the Bible was inspired by God who wanted us to know that even the greatest people in history made huge mistakes and God forgave them anyway, just as he forgives us. Some examples: Jacob was a con artist, Moses was a drunk, Abraham was a coward that kept telling people his wife was his sister so they didn't kill him, Lot tried to pimp out his daughters to sodomites, King David was an adulterer and murderer.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
10,503
Location
Pacific N.W.
Uh, No. One of the jurors just came out saying she, and 90% of her fellow jurors, treated the verdict as direct revenge against what happened to Rodney King. It amounted to jury nullification. IOW, they were all racists looking to settle a score.

The predictable violent responses we see nowadays is a direct result of an inability to properly resolve disputes among your peers. It's inevitably what happens when there are no male role models in the home and young boys are raised by hysterical, emotional single mothers.

Watching the linked video, I have to think @vincent3685 is correct.

 

Latest posts

Top