Greatest Sect of Christianity

[loinburger]

Greatest T-Rex of Christianity

[Elok]

That's awful small for a T-Rex. Heretic!

[loinburger]

It's actually an unusually large Jesus, which answers the question, "could God make a Jesus so big that he could ride a T-Rex?"

[MOBIUS]

God could make Jesus any size he likes, apparently.

[Elok]

It's actually an unusually large Jesus, which answers the question, "could God make a Jesus so big that he could ride a T-Rex?"

Fair enough, but that illustration doesn't look very anatomically accurate so we still have a problem. What the heck is up with that right arm?

[Tupac Shakur]

Lacking the divine inspiration that flows from God, atheists are invariably terrible artists.

[loinburger]

It looks like Jesus took the dinosaur's elbow in order to give himself a second right elbow

[loinburger]

Lacking the divine inspiration that flows from God, atheists are invariably terrible artists.

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/5002/5002_01.asp

In Jack Chick's defense, he has humans riding herbivorous dinosaurs instead of carnivorous dinosaurs (although Chick might be in the "all dinosaurs were plant-eating before the flood" crowd)

[Elok]

My browser's security software flipped out when I tried to go to conservapedia, but IIRC they have an excellent illustration of Jesus riding a sauropod in their entry on dinosaurs.

[loinburger]

I'm not sure if even the people who run Conservapedia know which editors are trolls and which are legitimate.

Senior Editor: I'm going to delete this article about Jesus riding on dinosaurs.
Andrew Schlafly: Why???
Senior Editor: It's obviously fake, nobody is stupid enough to believe that Jesus rode on dinosaurs.
Andrew Schlafly: I wrote that article, you heretic!

[Elok]

Schlafly? Any relation to Phyllis?

[loinburger]

Yup, her son. He's the founder of conservapedia.

[Kidlicious]

"Correctly" is in the eye of the beholder. I think the "conservative" approach is dead wrong in Bible interpretation (of course that depends on what the conservative approach actually is - as a lot of a conservatives are against Higher Criticism methods of interpretation or against looking at the context at all). Of course that doesn't mean that I am final authority. The conversation about how to treat the Scriptures should help us decifer it for each of us.

Also I believe in the continual revelation of God's will through the workings of the Holy Spirit. Which tends to mean I'm not a Bibliolater.

Interesting, so you think Jesus rode a T-Rex because that's in the eye of the beholder. You probably anticipated that response so let me ask you this. In eternity will anyone believe that, and if not will it still be true? If it's not true in eternity than how can it be true for an instant?

See in eternity Jesus riding a dinosaur is not at all funny, not to anyone. The darkness will be gone, and neither will anyone say, "truth is in the eye of the beholder." And that is why conservative is always right.

[loinburger]

Interesting, so you think Jesus rode a T-Rex because that's in the eye of the beholder. You probably anticipated that response so let me ask you this. In eternity will anyone believe that, and if not will it still be true? If it's not true in eternity than how can it be true for an instant?

See in eternity Jesus riding a dinosaur is not at all funny, not to anyone. The darkness will be gone, and neither will anyone say, "truth is in the eye of the beholder." And that is why conservative is always right.

So because the conservative approach refuses to admit that it might be the least bit wrong, the logical conclusion is that the conservative approach must be 100% correct? I admit that it would probably be nice to be omniscient, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to delude myself into believing that I'm omniscient.

[MOBIUS]

Loin, you have to remember that in the absence of BK, Kid is the new BK. Perhaps you could convince him to threaten you with physical violence...?