Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

27
()
posted 4 years ago by Terrorist 4 years ago by Terrorist +27 / -0
59 comments share
59 comments share save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (59)
sorted by:
▲ 1 ▼
– TurnToGodNow 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

It doesn't concern you at all that you sound just like the unsaved filthy world? Is there any history of Christian scholarship where scholars referred to others with racial slurs and perverse language (talking about people's genitals)?

Btw, since you worship your race so much, how did New Zealand succumb to this tyranny worse than any other nation, they are vast majority white Anglos https://media.communities.win/post/TCjUjELa4bMO.png

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– deleted 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0
▲ 1 ▼
– TurnToGodNow 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

Theres plenty of it, you just stick your fingers in your ears and act like it doesnt exist 🤷‍♂️

Now I know you aren't serious. There is no serious Christian scholarship that sounds as filthy and worldly as you do.

Your quote from Deuteronomy is also translated as "illegitimate birth" as in sex outside of marriage. And this is not pertaining to salvation, but to the priest class. You recall how Jews have all these rules about birth for their priests (the Cohanim) based on birth?

They also mention no one who has been "emasculated" i.e made into a eunich can enter the assymbly of God. This is in contrast to other religions at the time with Eunoch priest classes, further setting them apart from the pagans around them https://gnosticwarrior.com/enoch-priesthood.html

Neck yourself, you filthy fucking monkey

So pious. If you care about scripture you know such murderous language is anti Christ. "love your enemy, bless those who curse you". "You are neither Jew nor Greek but one in Christ" There was nothing in Christ's message (who you claim to follow) justifying your murders and your hate. You are of the world bro.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– deleted 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0
▲ 1 ▼
– TurnToGodNow 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

So you are saying you don't trust KJV's translation? Here is the definition of bastard in old English.

"illegitimate child," early 13c., from Old French bastard "acknowledged child of a nobleman by a woman other than his wife" (11c., Modern French bâtard), probably from fils de bast "packsaddle son," meaning a child conceived on an improvised bed

https://www.etymonline.com/word/bastard

So this is yet another point proving this verse has nothing to do with salvation. And this is even only looking at old covenant, you haven't even touched on the new covenant.

You are either 1) not serious 2) delusional. Either way unsaved.

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?
▲ 1 ▼
– deleted 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0
▲ 1 ▼
– TurnToGodNow 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

Eunuchs are offered redemption, mongrels are not.

Eunuchs were mentioned in the same chapter you quoted your misinterpretation of the verse about illegitimate children. This only proves my point that it was in regards to the priest class and not salvation.

1 No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of the Lord.

2 No one born of a illegitimate birth nor any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord, not even in the tenth generation.

Deuteronomy 23

I never argued Eunuchs were not offered redemption. I'm showing you your entire premise is wrong in interpreting Deuteronomy 23. You are no either contradicting yourself or you need to re-examine Deuteronomy 23's meaning.

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No subversion.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
  • Perun
  • Thisisnotanexit
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2026.02.01 - 8wn6p (status)

Copyright © 2026.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy