Keith Olbermann Smacks Down O'Reilly and Gibson

[opebo]

Jesus Christ himself meets Olbermann’s definition of “intolerant”...

Obviously Jesus was an intolerant, jmfcst, if he existed.  Or an intolerant fictional cult leader invented by intolerants, if he didn't.

[opebo]

Now there's an interesting phrase.  "Religious intolerance."  Is Gibson being religiously intolerant for sticking up for the concept of Christmas in America, or are those that are systematically stripping Christmas out of America being the religious intolerants?  Sorry, but I would have to go with the second of the two.

No, MODU, one cannot tolerate intolerance (or intolerants) if one wishes to be a tolerant. 

[opebo]

The bible claims that Christianity is the only "right" religion!

Doesn't matter, it's still a hateful comment towards those who are not Christians. 

No, it is NOT a message of hate.  To the contrary, it is a message of salvation, which is why Jesus called it the "Good News" (which means "Gospel").

Of course it is a message of hate, jmfcst, from christians to non-christians.  There is no such thing as 'salvation' or 'god', merely subjective preferences.

[opebo]

So, then you yourself would label Jesus as "intolerant" by him saying, "whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son"?

Please don't compare Jesus and John Gibson.

Why not, aren't they saying the same thing:  "whoever doesn't believe in Christ will be condemned"?

Are you suggesting that whoever doesn't believe in John Gibson will be condemned?

Obviously, I am not, so don't play stupid.

I am saying that both John Gibson and Jesus are claiming that there is only one way to be saved and that is through Jesus Christ.

Therefore, Gibson is only echoing what Jesus Christ taught.  So whatever problem a person has with Gibson's belief that Jesus is the only path to salvation, they will also have a problem with what Jesus believed about himself, since Gibson and Jesus are in agreement on this issue.

Why should these two persons (Gibbon and Jesus) think that their subject sexual preferences have any validity for any other persons?

[opebo]

Why should these two persons (Gibbon and Jesus) think that their subject sexual preferences have any validity for any other persons?

Wrong thread.  Let's just stick with comparing Gibson's claims about Jesus with what Jesus claimed about himself.

Yes, Gibson is an authentic.  But alas, an authentic intolerant.

[opebo]

Umm you were the one just the other day announcing the coming rapture right?  If you are not part of the insane fundamentalist movement who sees an imaginary war on Christianity than I apologize.  =)

Yes, I believe in a coming Rapture, and yes I believe Christians in the US are being mocked for their faith, just as Olbermann mocked Gibson for giving his personal opinion that he believes Christianity is the only path to salvation.  In other countries, Christians are being killed for their faith in Christ.

You can't go around saying people are 'damned to hell' and expect them not to hate you for it, you dolt.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Controlling your own flesh?  Why would you want to do that?  Your body is a perfectly well-functioning and quite inoffensive thing.   It is quite literally you.  Your attitude towards it, not to mention your bizarre fantasies of 'sin' suggest self-hatred, and I recomend psychoanalysis.

[opebo]

Jmfcst has a tendency to say 'Christians' when really he means himself. It is classic self-righteousness. He fails to realise than many if not the majority of Christians in America and around the world hold vastly different views on the matter than he does.

jmfcst is to the bible as Emsworth and Philip are to the constitution!

[opebo]

While jmfcst's repulsiveness may tempt one to blame him for this intolerance, afleitch, he is quite correct that it is the official position of your cult.  It, like all cults, is intolerant.  I would recommend jettisoning it and facing the world like an intelligent secular. 

[opebo]

The only reason you hate the idea of one Christian correcting another is because you yourself feel ashamed of your refusal to obey the New Testament teachings.

He should feel ashamed of lending any credence to your absurd cult of hate, jmfcst, not for his sex life.

[opebo]

Even if you were ashamed of your sexuality, it's not like you can do anything about it.

Really?  You don't believe Jesus Christ has the power to transform a life? 

Um, jmfcst, Jesus, if he ever existed, is dead now, and therefore cannot 'transform' anything. 

[opebo]

…So, if Jesus Christ is dead, why are you so fascinated with him?  What is it that he has that you so desperately want?

You poor sap, I was responding to your post.   That fictional character only comes up in conversation so much because the world is ruled by your ilk, and unfortunately we reasonable people have to deal with you.