William lulzblogs Chick Tracts because he hates himself

edited 25th Nov '12 2:52:59 PM by JosefBugman

God the Father was in the Old Testement.

Jesus is God the Son.

Different aspects, different personalities.

"You fail to grasp the basic principles of mad science. Common sense would be cheating." - Narbonic

Well, concerning being good, that most people are good to those that they love. Can't think of many parents that don't buy food for their kids, unless they're into the whole child neglect thing. It's what Christianity teaches about how we should treat those who oppress us that is the difference. Jesus did not start the revolution to kick Rome out of Israel, but a lot of people wanted Him to do that, as the messianic verses in the OT alluded to a conquering king, not someone who gets stuck on some rough-cut wooden beams and killed, even though a metric butt-ton of messianic OT scripture alludes directly to that, as well.

About the only time He got well and truly upset was when he observed the temple money-changers and how they would rip off those who were trying to do the right thing and worship according to the Law. The prayer of the tax-collector got His attention. "Lord, be merciful to me, a sinner." In contrast to the religious one, "I thank you Lord that I'm not like this Tax Collector, and I'm all that and a bag of chips." I paraphrased, but that was basically his attitude, holier then thou. God loves an honest and contrite heart and has mercy for that. Hence why Pride is listed as a deadly sin, as pride is probably the biggest one around.

Wow, I ramble. Sorry about that...

Concerning never having heard: Complex topic. Much disagreement amongst even Christians on it. NO specific verse directly alludes to it, but there's a tidbit in Romans about how those who sin without the Law will also perish without the Law. Well, the natural question is this: If the guy did right according to his non-Law, how will he be judged? Considering man's fallen nature, probably not very well, which is why it is critical to evangelize.

edited 5th Dec '09 4:55:48 PM by pvtnum11

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

edited 25th Nov '12 2:55:21 PM by JosefBugman

It's Okay. Just don't assume that those who do are worse than you.

INT is knowing a tomato is a fruit. WIS is knowing it doesn't belong in a fruit salad. CHA is convincing people that it does.

edited 25th Nov '12 2:58:01 PM by JosefBugman

Ask a rational, saner guy than me.

Don't bother asking a fundie, you'd get worse.

INT is knowing a tomato is a fruit. WIS is knowing it doesn't belong in a fruit salad. CHA is convincing people that it does.

I think I'm better off becasue I'm assured of where I go, and it's a good place to be.

If you are right, that's true.

If you are wrong, you have wasted a significant amount of effort on your religion that you didn't need to.

I'd say it's pretty balanced.

not someone who gets stuck on some rough-cut wooden beams and killed, even though a metric butt-ton of messianic OT scripture alludes directly to that

I am positive that, if that was true, some rabbi or other would have picked up on it before it actually happened.

So, I'm going to have to ask you to prove this.

I'm convinced that our modern day analogues to ancient scholars are comedians. -0dd1

Ah, Pascal's Wager. If I'm wrong, I've had a good life by my reckoning, after all is said and done. If you're wrong... it's not too late to change your mind.

Book of Isaiah is full of scriptures fulfilled in the four Gospel accounts. I'd type them, but a link will suffice. [1]

And there are Messianic Jews, who believe He was the Messiah.

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

The big problem with Pascal's Wager—the one that people often overlook—is that you can't choose to believe something. Either you find it plausible, you find it implausible, or you don't know what to make of it. I find the major tenets of Christianity implausible.

Besides, the choice isn't simply between believing in God (and going to Heaven if you're right) vs. disbelieving in God (and going to Hell if you're wrong). The variety of gods that can be proposed is potentially infinite. What if what God really wants is for us to burn all the churches and wear only blue clothes for the rest of our lives, and will send us to a Hell ten times worse than the one proposed by Christians if we don't comply? Hadn't we better do it, just in case?

edited 5th Dec '09 9:12:55 PM by Karalora

I like the stance Judaism takes on it: "The righteous of all kingdoms will be granted to heaven."

"Proto-Indo-European makes the damnedest words related. It's great. It's the Kevin Bacon of etymology." ~Madrugada

I actually don't look too shabby in blue, but I prefer black.

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

What's this? A mostly civil discussion? Time to shake things up!

(Kidding, kidding- but I am going to voice my thoughts. Hopefully they will not be too offensive.)

Oh! That's where the text for Handel's Messiah comes from.

Anyway question time:

1. Does it even make sense to trace Jesus' lineage through Joseph, considering they weren't biologically related? (This isn't meant to be offensive, I'm honestly asking whether there's precedent. For example, were adopted children generally included in genealogies as having been begotten by their adoptive parents?)

2. To consider something true (assuming we're not accepting everything on faith), we must consider it more likely than the alternatives. Regarding Jesus's fulfillment of the prophecies, there are two possibilities: that Jesus really fulfilled all these prophecies because he was the Messiah, and the Old Testament was the word of God, or that the truth of the matter has been obscured somehow. Then, consider the following: the Gospels were written years after Jesus died, by people who had access to the prophecies in Isaiah, for an audience which believed in the prophecies. Previously assuming the possibility, but not necessity, of the existence of a god, which seems more likely, based on this evidence- that there is a god, of the kind described in the Bible, who has so far failed to destroy cities with fire or turn people into pillars of salt, or prove his existence in any non-oblique way, or that a couple guys fudged the facts a little to make something more believable? (Also see, for example, Wikipedia re: Jesus genealogy.) I'm not saying there's no way to prove to yourself that the Christian God exists and/or that Jesus was a savior sent by him, but the prophecies aren't the best basis for either of those beliefs.

Just my two cents. Sorry if this is rather long..

edited 6th Dec '09 7:11:59 AM by intuition

"I like them to talk nonsense. That's man's one privilege over all creation. Through error you come to truth! You never reach any truth without making fourteen mistakes- and very likely a hundred and fourteen." - Razumikhin, Crime and Punishment

Um, now, still not trying to attack you, but the very first prophecy on that page hasn't been fulfilled:

Jesus wasn't king of anything. Certainly he isn't still.

And also I notice several of those definitely were not intended to be prophecies. (The ones from Psalms, say) And also just because the Gospels say something Jesus did fulfilled a prophecy doesn't actually mean he did fulfill that prophecy. The writers of the Gospels were all Christians, you know, they aren't going to say, "Ah, here's a prophecy Jesus obviously didn't fulfill". For that matter, same for the author of your list.

edited 6th Dec '09 10:20:51 AM by BlackHumor

I'm convinced that our modern day analogues to ancient scholars are comedians. -0dd1

Scripture interpretation is always a stickler with a lot of people. Even amongst Christians. Of course, to clear up some of the debate, reading what was written in the original languages tends to work. Not that I can do that, but there's some outstanding translations that went to the root language texts. However, hard to argue with Isaiah 7:14.

...not that I want to start yet another debate as to which English translation is superior, we already have enough on our plate at the moment.

He wasn't much of a king when He was here on the planet, though. At least, He didn't meet our expectations of a king. Partly why Israel pretty much disregarded Him at the time - even some of His own disciples asked if He was going to restore the kingdom again, referring to Israel as a sovereign nation, and get them out of under Rome's thumb. Out of mockery, the Romans placed the sign on His cross that said "King of the Jews", and that made some of the Sanhedrin a bit upset. Genealogies are a bit hard to sort out. Done through Joseph, the legal father, and through Mary, through a maternal link back to David.

So, was He who He said He was? Or was He just a nifty religious figure? Or was He an utter nut-job? Really, if you look at the claims and teachings He made, you're left with only two options, nut-job or Lord. A lot of people take the nicer religious figure role, but I can foresee some here that would raise their hand at nut-job.

Which is fine, ain't going to bother me at all.

edited 6th Dec '09 2:51:40 PM by pvtnum11

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

I'm going to go with Take a Third Option for $1000, Alex...

He was a semi-radical religious leader with some genuinely good ideas...and Sure, Why Not?, I'm not an atheist—he was even touched by divine inspiration. But his exploits were exaggerated long after the fact by his followers, including a heaping helping of syncretism from some other popular cults of the time, such as Mithraism.

Can we get back to making fun of this asshat before Serious Business ensues?

an heroic gesture would do the world good

Seconding Sneeb.

INT is knowing a tomato is a fruit. WIS is knowing it doesn't belong in a fruit salad. CHA is convincing people that it does.

^ LOL

Sure, I'll let you all get back to your fun, sorry for spoiling it. Been fun, anyway.

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

Hooray rerail!

Sorry, I can't hear you from my FLYING METAL BOX!

Yay rerail!

-claps happily-

"You fail to grasp the basic principles of mad science. Common sense would be cheating." - Narbonic

I decree that part 2 of this lulzblog will come...TONIGHT!

SHIKI is dead.

Arrr Haiiiiur Uirriamu!

edited 7th Dec '09 2:37:50 PM by Haven

Productivity is for people without internet connections. -Count Dorku

BOW TO THE LULZKING!

"You fail to grasp the basic principles of mad science. Common sense would be cheating." - Narbonic

Haha, "lulzking"? I'm not sure I'm that good.

But anyways. Previously, on William Wide Web Masochism Theatre, we got to see a young girl learn real magic from a game, and another young girl kill herself because her character died in a D&D game. We left off in the panel that showed her committing suicide.

Next panel, we get to see her suicide note. "It's my fault Black Leaf died. I can't face life alone! -Marcie" Honestly, I don't know how losing your Dungeons and Dragons character makes you face life alone. Maybe because their D&D group was composed of total jerks that didn't let her get resurrected or roll up a new character or anythng.

In the next panel, ELFSTAR is upset about her friend's death, and thinks that she could have prevented it had she left the game. There is no connecting logic whatsoever in this section—frankly, if someone is going to kill themself over an RP character, they probably have a deeper problem than Dungeons and Dragons. Also, the way she has her hands over her face looks less like sorrow and more like some sort of monster devouring her. Either way, the GM gets mad at her because she's prioritizing "some lousy loser's life" over her "spiritual growth through the game". Honestly, why would you play D&D with someone you hate like that?

And in the next panel, the GM says that it would have happened sooner or later because anyone who kills themself over a game of Dungeons and Dragons has some sort of mental disorder. No, wait, that's what she would say if the author of this comic had any sort of sense. The GM actually says it would have happened sooner or later because the character was too weak. ELFSTAR responds with a vague reference to the Wiccan Rede("An it harm none do what ye will") and a statement about harming Marcie. Honestly, bringing up the Wiccan Rede in the context of a game where magic is used for combat is frankly so ridiculously stupid that I can't even begin.

And in the next panel we have a wonderful QUALITY face from the GM, where she tells Debbie to "let Elfstar take care of things". Honestly, between the QUALITY, the name ELFSTAR, and the fact that Jack Chick thinks Dungeons and Dragons is valid training for Wiccans, I find this increasingly difficult to believe that it was ever meant in seriousness. And yet, Jack Chick finds a way to be serious. And I haven't even mentioned what ELFSTAR said in return: "I don't want to be Elfstar any more. I want to be Debbie."

And in the next panel, ELFSTAR is talking to somebody else in an abrupt scene change. Apparently this guy is the obnoxious Christian protagonist of this tract. He's talking about how Jesus is the only answer and he's been praying and fasting for her, because she's involved in "spiritual warfare". Our obnoxious protagonist invites ELFSTAR to a meeting about someone who "came out of witchcraft".

In the next panel, where else are we but in the meeting itself? Nothing really to note about the art, except that the speaker has a moustache. And his rant is generic fundie Christian stuff, although I have to note this line: "You, who are involved in the occult, think you have achieved power, but you have been trapped in a dungeon of bondage"(emphasis mine). It makes me think of that book about Satan that melloncollie's lulzblogging.

And in the next panel, we get to see Moustache Man more closely(and the background disappears because Gainax is running out of money) as he talks about burning rock music and Dungeons and Dragons material. Not just throwing them away but burning them. That...that kind of pisses me off, especially since this guy is supposed to be the protagonist. The burning of media is one of those things that seriously annoys me. Furthermore, the sudden inclusion of rock music sort of took me by surprise. I mean, I know Jack Chick hates rock music, but this tract isn't about rock music; it's about Dungeons and Dragons.

And in the next panel, we see Moustache Man telling everyone who wants to convert to step up, which is basically a call for us to see ELFSTAR converting immediately upon seeing a guy with a moustache talk about how Dungeons and Dragons is evil, despite not providing any arguments whatsoever. At least he isn't using his own tracts in this one like he has in other tracts.

And then you see a woman, who is presumably ELFSTAR but looks significantly older than in previous panels, step forward and complete her conversion from an intentional caricature of something Jack Chick doesn't like into an unintentional caricature of Christianity. We then see Moustache Man laying his arms on ELFSTAR in a way that just plain doesn't seem wholesome. Also, we get to see random references to unrelated Bible verses on the bottom bar, and some vague black-and-white drawings whose intent I can't figure out from this picture. I seriously don't konw what it's supposed to be.

And the next panel has Moustache Man saying some more Jesusy stuff which all begins to blend together after a while. And then there's the last panel(aside from the one that's on every single tract) in which ELFSTAR thanks the Lord for "setting [her] free", with her back to the camera, and some other guy(presumably Moustache Man) in silhouette because Gainax is running out of money. Also, we finally get to see the book-burning that the evil Christians set up.

As a sidenote, I have a vague feeling like this part of the lulzblog is a little bit lower quality than the rest of my liveblogs(including the first part of this tract), but frankly, I feel like I'm running out of things to say. I'm not sure, though, if that's because I'm actually running out of things to say or because my mood today is different from my normal mood when I'm writing these lulzblogs. And, of course, I may just be imagining this drop in quality. Can somebody give a review of this stuff?

SHIKI is dead.