To clarify, I said this to Unimane: Unimane responded with this: So, assume you can read, and tell me how Unimane's position is confined to miracles and angels.
Purely based on numbers of registered party members. So you agree that if most people believed in dragons rather than angels, it would be "ridiculous" to believe in angels but not dragons?
Because he knows that Christianity as a religion exists. It is the components of it's beliefs that he thinks is bullshit. Or do you think Unimane denies the existence of Christianity as a religion?
That's not what you said. You said that he compared purple dragons to angels and miracles. That is not what he did. He did so to Christianity in general, which is total bullshit.
Only on alternating Tuesdays. I should point out that tonight's sermon was about a talking donkey though.
But the origins of "angels" is the same as "dragons." Both are biblical. Western dragons have been taken directly from Genesis (the Greek word for serpent and dragon are identical), Job, Deuteronomy, Psalm, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekial, and others. If you are a Christian who believes the Bible is accurate and truthful, you believe in dragons in various forms, both real and spiritual. If this bothers you, I encourage you to reflect on it. But don't tell me it is insulting to say you believe in things like dragons because you literally do if you see the Bible as the word of God. EDIT: And revelations is obviously filled with dragons as well.
You think he was saying Christianity is a purple dragon. That he thinks Christianity doesn't exist. Okay. You've convinced yourself of that. Good luck convincing anyone else.
IP, are you just pretending that you're stupid or are you actually stupid? He compared believing in Christianity to believing in purple dragons. If you can't figure out that that casts Christians as being on the same level as people believing that Barney the [uck fay]ing dinosaur is real then I don't know what to tell you. Believe it or not, that's not only insulting, it's stupid, just as your little game that you're playing now.
If the Bible isn't literal, I don't have many complaints with it. So if it is a dragon, it is a symbol? I am very certain Leviathan and Behemoth were not symbols in Jewish tradition. And dragons certainly weren't symbolic to Christians up until-- ah yes, the Age of Enlightenment. Huh.
Are you actually a Christian, or are you just pretending? If you are, you know that you believe in dragons.
No, it was a serendipitous turn of phrase. Had it not been latched onto in manufactured outraged, I would not have even brought it up. But if you guys want to talk about dragons, I'm all for it. Let's talk about Christianity and dragons.
I was referring to Unimane's words. The dragon stuff is 100% irrelevant and you know it. The only view of dragons that is germane to this discussion is Unimane's. It's pretty clear how he views them. If you want to argue tangents simply to divert attention from the guy on your side that made a fool of himself I have no interest in continuing.
Manufactured outrage? The man said that believing in Christianity means you feel you are superior to those who do not.
