Image
Image
Image

Topics Calendar

December 2018

S M T W T F S
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31

Who is online

In total there are 18 users online :: 8 registered, 1 hidden and 9 guests

Most users ever online was 454 on Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:04 pm

Registered users: AhrefsBot, BaggyTrousers, Bing [Bot], BUZZ2491, Google [Bot], SemrushBot, Tender, YandexBot


Legend :: Administrators, Moderators

Statistics

Total posts 657964
Total topics 19120
Total members 2928
Our newest member joe soap

Birthdays

Congratulations to: Setanta (68)

Biblical matters

Fancy a pint? Join the crai­c and non-rugby topics here.

Moderators: The Fonz, Moderators

  • Advertisement

Topic Rating:
  • 3 votes
  

Re: Biblical matters

Postby caledoniancelt » Fri May 13, 2016 7:26 am

BaggyTrousers wrote:Jack, 2 fine pieces of splendid bit of wisdom, but FFS man ..............the question is to stone or not to stone?

The mentalists appear to be adherents of Bob Dylan.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0Zxd5jp-lI


Forgive your good lady Baggy and continue to see out your days together
for many more years DV.

If you fancy a proxy punishment burn wee Mads and/or Big Rob K. :stir:
User avatar
caledoniancelt
Initiate
 
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:45 am
Location: The potato growing part of North Down

Re: Biblical matters

Postby big mervyn » Fri May 13, 2016 7:43 am

caledoniancelt wrote:
BaggyTrousers wrote:Jack, 2 fine pieces of splendid bit of wisdom, but FFS man ..............the question is to stone or not to stone?

The mentalists appear to be adherents of Bob Dylan.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0Zxd5jp-lI


Forgive your good lady Baggy and continue to see out your days together
for many more years DV.

If you fancy a proxy punishment burn wee Mads and/or Big Rob K. :stir:

Good call. The auld scapegoat - a get out in the Biblical small print. :thumleft:

And Aaron shall place lots upon the two goats: one lot "For the Lord," and the other lot, "For Azazel (for absolute removal).
— Leviticus 16:8
Volunteer at an animal sanctuary; it will fill you with joy , despair, but most of all love, unconditional love of the animals.
Big Neville Southall
User avatar
big mervyn
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
 
Posts: 10658
Images: 8
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Overlooking the pitch (til they built the old new stand)

Re: Biblical matters

Postby mikerob » Fri May 13, 2016 9:48 am

caledoniancelt wrote:
BaggyTrousers wrote:Jack, 2 fine pieces of splendid bit of wisdom, but FFS man ..............the question is to stone or not to stone?

The mentalists appear to be adherents of Bob Dylan.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0Zxd5jp-lI


Forgive your good lady Baggy and continue to see out your days together
for many more years DV.

If you fancy a proxy punishment burn wee Mads and/or Big Rob K. :stir:


No mention in the bible of using Leinster players as animal sacrifices and burnt offerings, it is strictly, cattle, sheep, goats, turtledoves and pigeons.

However maybe the URSC summer barbeque could have an altar (it needs to be 5 cubits by 5 cubits and made from acacia wood) and symbolically serve Kearney burgers and Madigan wings.
User avatar
mikerob
Lord Chancellor
 
Posts: 9117
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:50 pm
Location: Chiswick, London

Re: Biblical matters

Postby promenader » Fri May 13, 2016 9:57 am

CIMANFOREVER wrote:Well the Egyptians were f*cked after the plagues.. were they a metaphor for STI's?

And Mary's shagging was, in His own words, Immaculate, so fair do's Big Man...

A common theological misunderstanding, or misconception. if you don't mind the odd bad pun. Mary's shagging, as you put it, is covered by the doctrine of the Virgin birth. The doctrine of the Immaculate conception has nothing to do with the begetting of jesus, but rather covers the birth of Mary herself. As the future mother of God, you see, it was inconceivable - :cheers: - that she should be born, like other mere mortals, with the mark of original sin staining her soul. (Adam's fault, and hence the need for Christian weans to be baptised). She was, unique in the history of mankind, excused this shame and was therefore conceived immaculately.
As Baggy says, you have been helped.
User avatar
promenader
Novice
 
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Biblical matters

Postby HairyJ » Fri May 13, 2016 10:08 am

promenader wrote:
CIMANFOREVER wrote:Well the Egyptians were f*cked after the plagues.. were they a metaphor for STI's?

And Mary's shagging was, in His own words, Immaculate, so fair do's Big Man...

A common theological misunderstanding, or misconception. if you don't mind the odd bad pun. Mary's shagging, as you put it, is covered by the doctrine of the Virgin birth. The doctrine of the Immaculate conception has nothing to do with the begetting of jesus, but rather covers the birth of Mary herself. As the future mother of God, you see, it was inconceivable - :cheers: - that she should be born, like other mere mortals, with the mark of original sin staining her soul. (Adam's fault, and hence the need for Christian weans to be baptised). She was, unique in the history of mankind, excused this shame and was therefore conceived immaculately.
As Baggy says, you have been helped.

Like Anakin Skywalker?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
User avatar
HairyJ
Initiate
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:09 pm

Re: Biblical matters

Postby BaggyTrousers » Fri May 13, 2016 10:09 am

promenader wrote:
CIMANFOREVER wrote:Well the Egyptians were f*cked after the plagues.. were they a metaphor for STI's?

And Mary's shagging was, in His own words, Immaculate, so fair do's Big Man...

A common theological misunderstanding, or misconception. if you don't mind the odd bad pun. Mary's shagging, as you put it, is covered by the doctrine of the Virgin birth. The doctrine of the Immaculate conception has nothing to do with the begetting of jesus, but rather covers the birth of Mary herself. As the future mother of God, you see, it was inconceivable - :cheers: - that she should be born, like other mere mortals, with the mark of original sin staining her soul. (Adam's fault, and hence the need for Christian weans to be baptised). She was, unique in the history of mankind, excused this shame and was therefore conceived immaculately.
As Baggy says, you have been helped.



:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Splendid stuff Prom, though in fairness to me, I usually try to make my "advice/help" somewhere vaguely bordering on believable.
Support the team and coaching staff. Forget the rest,BUT NEVER MOVE ON.

FIRFU - FU'CK YOU ONE AND ALL, CAVING IN TO SPONSORS, SACKING THE INNOCENT FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE, SHAMEFUL BASTA'RDS. YOU'VE LOST MY SUPPORT & I HOPE MORE ULSTERMEN & WOMEN
User avatar
BaggyTrousers
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
 
Posts: 30156
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: España

Re: Biblical matters

Postby rumncoke » Fri May 13, 2016 10:30 am

Baggy as a matter of Interest what is an old Hedonist like you reading the bible ? I thought you had found salvation in a bottle !!

Anyway my question/statement did you still love your wife? then do nothing, is based on the experiences of life that only those who want a divorce look for grounds for divorce in the actions of their partners . They do so for two reasons firstly to justify their own wish for a divorce and secondly to transfer the guilt of the failed marriage onto the other party.

I have known several women whose husbands walked out on their wives to live with the other woman it wasn't that the husband walked out that hurt them most but the fact that in the letter of departure they blamed their wives for the failure of the marriage .
Within this carapace of skepticism there lives an optimist
User avatar
rumncoke
Lord Chancellor
 
Posts: 6038
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:39 pm

Re: Biblical matters

Postby jackthelad » Fri May 13, 2016 11:52 am

promenader wrote:
CIMANFOREVER wrote:Well the Egyptians were f*cked after the plagues.. were they a metaphor for STI's?

And Mary's shagging was, in His own words, Immaculate, so fair do's Big Man...

A common theological misunderstanding, or misconception. if you don't mind the odd bad pun. Mary's shagging, as you put it, is covered by the doctrine of the Virgin birth. The doctrine of the Immaculate conception has nothing to do with the begetting of jesus, but rather covers the birth of Mary herself. As the future mother of God, you see, it was inconceivable - :cheers: - that she should be born, like other mere mortals, with the mark of original sin staining her soul. (Adam's fault, and hence the need for Christian weans to be baptised). She was, unique in the history of mankind, excused this shame and was therefore conceived immaculately.
As Baggy says, you have been helped.


Was she found in a Lucky Bag?
Smear me in chocolate and throw me to the Lesbians.
User avatar
jackthelad
Warrior Chief
 
Posts: 1533
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 12:34 am
Location: Antrim

Re: Biblical matters

Postby Russ » Fri May 13, 2016 12:20 pm

rumncoke wrote:Baggy as a matter of Interest what is an old Hedonist like you reading the bible ? I thought you had found salvation in a bottle !!

Anyway my question/statement did you still love your wife? then do nothing, is based on the experiences of life that only those who want a divorce look for grounds for divorce in the actions of their partners . They do so for two reasons firstly to justify their own wish for a divorce and secondly to transfer the guilt of the failed marriage onto the other party.

I have known several women whose husbands walked out on their wives to live with the other woman it wasn't that the husband walked out that hurt them most but the fact that in the letter of departure they blamed their wives for the failure of the marriage .

We need to learn the mistakes from fiction too
User avatar
Russ
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
 
Posts: 28210
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: Looking for George North's defence

Re: Biblical matters

Postby DavidWolfe » Fri May 13, 2016 12:29 pm

Let's make this simple.

If she tickles that bit behind your ballix and before yer ersehole at the right time, she's learnt that from someone else.
User avatar
DavidWolfe
Novice
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 10:42 am

Re: Biblical matters

Postby rorybestsbigbaldnoggin » Fri May 13, 2016 12:56 pm

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
It's the hope that kills you.
User avatar
rorybestsbigbaldnoggin
Red Hand Ambassador
 
Posts: 2506
Images: 1
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 3:31 pm
Location: Bengor West

Re: Biblical matters

Postby Jockster » Fri May 13, 2016 1:18 pm

Could you not just get her "stoned" in the Bob Dylan sense :cowboy:

My issue with the virgin birth was more to do with her husband Joseph not consummating his marriage. Could never work that one out.
User avatar
Jockster
Squire
 
Posts: 677
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 12:53 pm
Location: Banbridge--Belfast--and on me bike

Re: Biblical matters

Postby Rooster » Fri May 13, 2016 3:33 pm

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Look what is in the papers today

Ironically, given the historic tension between pornography and religion, watching porn may make you more religious.

That’s according to a study published in the Journal of Sex Research, which suggests that those who watch porn more than once a week may ‘stimulate greater religiosity’.

Historically, religiosity was associated with low pornography use as almost all major religious disapprove of it.

Thanks to the upsurge in porn use, more and more research is being conducted into the area.

The research, which was done by a team at the University of Oklahoma, involved following the same 1,314 adults over six years, periodically measuring their porn use and religiosity.


After controlling for outside factors like age and gender, use of pornography was associated with low religiousness until the rate of consumption became more frequent than once a week.

‘Findings suggest that viewing pornography may lead to declines in some dimensions of religiosity but at more extreme levels may actually stimulate, or at least be conducive to, greater religiosity along other dimensions,’ said study author Samuel Perry.

In other words, if you watch porn more than once a week you’re likely to become more religious.

Perry suggests this might be because in some people exposure to pornography brings about guilty feelings, especially if they were religious to begin with, and this may drive them to turn to religion to try and overcome the behaviour or repent in some way.
“That made me feel very special and underlined to me that Ulster is more than a team, it is a community and a rugby family"
Rory Best
User avatar
Rooster
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
 
Posts: 39849
Images: 5
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 12:39 am
Location: Chicken coop 17

Re: Biblical matters

Postby BaggyTrousers » Fri May 13, 2016 4:24 pm

rumncoke wrote:Baggy as a matter of Interest what is an old Hedonist like you reading the bible ? I thought you had found salvation in a bottle !!

Anyway my question/statement did you still love your wife? then do nothing, is based on the experiences of life that only those who want a divorce look for grounds for divorce in the actions of their partners . They do so for two reasons firstly to justify their own wish for a divorce and secondly to transfer the guilt of the failed marriage onto the other party.

I have known several women whose husbands walked out on their wives to live with the other woman it wasn't that the husband walked out that hurt them most but the fact that in the letter of departure they blamed their wives for the failure of the marriage .


OK Rum'n, here are your answers in order, though the information is already there:

- To know what the enemy are thinking.

- Yes I still love my wife, I have done since early July 1978 when I first clapped eyes upon her and had secured a contract with her by November of that year and then began saving seriously to buy & house and marry in February 1980. £18500 for a 3 bed chalet bungalow in Dunkeld Avenue in the Maiden City. I loved that house. :thumleft: That said, the issue is that I fear I may fall down in relation to "God's Law" >rtfm I have yet to be properly advised if I need to wheek her off to Israel for a stoning. She will smell a rat as I have often said I would never set foot in Israel - nor the rest of the Middle East forebye, (just for balance) and I may as well add that I have little interest in the Far East, could live without visiting the horrendously rude NZers & drunken racists in Oz, but I still enjoy the USA & have a wee hankering to visit South America.

By the way Rum'n, you have the wrong end of the stick, I used to be an inter-pro quality drinker :stout: but those days are past barring the occasional splurge. These days I am a man who drinks well within the approved levels (possibly before the most recent nonsense) for no other reason than, in general, I really just can't be bothered.

As for the rest of it Rum'n, it is of little interest as I will never require advice on divorce. We are and shall remain inseparable.......... and though I don't want to bore you with it :lol: , looking forward to our next large adventure, pissing off to Spain to live in just over a year.
Support the team and coaching staff. Forget the rest,BUT NEVER MOVE ON.

FIRFU - FU'CK YOU ONE AND ALL, CAVING IN TO SPONSORS, SACKING THE INNOCENT FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE, SHAMEFUL BASTA'RDS. YOU'VE LOST MY SUPPORT & I HOPE MORE ULSTERMEN & WOMEN
User avatar
BaggyTrousers
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
 
Posts: 30156
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: España

Re: Biblical matters

Postby Gary » Fri May 13, 2016 4:34 pm

Rooster, thon porn and religious thing is total bullsh1te. Sure, you know I'm an atheist.
"What's the requirement of my job? I don't have to be very clever, I don't have to know that much," - David Davis, Minister for Fecking Up Brexit
User avatar
Gary
Chancellor to the King
 
Posts: 3536
Images: 1
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 2:49 pm
Location: Carrickfergus and Odessa. (Not at the same time. That would be silly.)

PreviousNext


  • Advertisement

Return to The Back Room 'Lock In'

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AhrefsBot and 1 guest

Recent Forum Topics

!-- Piwik -->