User talk:OrangeMint

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, OrangeMint!

Please see our guide for newcomers and our community standards.

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

JorisEnter (talk) 13:09, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the truth prison! JorisEnter (talk) 13:49, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Lol. Yeah, thanks for that. Can't say I agree with every standpoint on here, but it feels nice to have more of an unbiased website to get some information. OrangeMint (talk) 13:54, 13 January 2016 (UTC)OrangeMint

Alex Jones[edit]

If you really wanna convince your friend that he's nuts, just play Alex Jones: Nerds Are Evil People with Brains Want to Take Us Over. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 18:47, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Incredible. Top Tier. Not even the grammar of the title is correct. OrangeMint (talk) 19:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)OrangeMint
I always like the video about how the clockworks elf apocalypse will find us though hyper dimensional eyes (click through to YouTube because I can't do the rant justice). -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 19:19, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
It's so worth watching this through to the end. I have trouble breathing from laughter. I knew Alex Jones was crazy, but not *this* crazy! Carpetsmoker (talk) 19:36, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Nerds are evil? That means I'll be taking over the country! --JorisEnter (talk) 19:51, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Autopatrolled[edit]

Because of your edits to and time on the wiki, Autopatrolled has been added to your user rights. This lets you bypass most of the abuse filters, bypass the CAPTCHA, and edit more frequently. If you have questions, bleat ask away.

We hope you enjoy your newfound ᴘᴏᴡᴇʀ — and these external tools:

You can't see it but I'm smiling OrangeMint (talk) 13:42, 2 February 2016 (UTC)OrangeMint

Leviticus 21:9[edit]

So, you say you are a Christian. What is your interpretation of Leviticus 21:9, which in one translation says "If a priest's daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she also defiles her father's holiness, and she must be burned to death." I can't believe this is the Word of God; I think this is better thought of as the Word of the Devil. Burning prostitutes to death is a doctrine fit only for serial killers. (((Zack Martin))) 08:00, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Like I said in my post, I don't follow everything the Bible says. Reread the post. There are questionable and downright terrible parts of the Bible. You don't agree with anything a politician says, and I don't believe everything the Bible says. I'm not some blind sheep who unquestionably follows the text. OrangeMint (talk) 12:33, 2 February 2016 (UTC)OrangeMint
So, you reject the doctrine of divine inspiration? Is any of the Bible the "Word of God"? Just the bits you like? (((Zack Martin))) 19:14, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Look, I don't blindly follow my religion like a zealot. I think there are good and bad things. Remember, this is a book written thousands of years ago. People acted and thought differently back then. I am allowed to question my religion and think critical of it. OrangeMint (talk) 12:31, 3 February 2016 (UTC)OrangeMint
Okay, but many Christians claim that all of the Bible is inspired. I take it then you say these people are wrong? Then the question is, how wrong do you say they are? Are they wrong to think all of the Bible is divinely inspired, yet nonetheless some of it is? Or are they wrong to think any of it is? Or is all of it inspired, but in a weaker sense of "inspiration" than theirs? (((Zack Martin))) 03:01, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Interpretation is what matters in a situation like this. What comes from a God can be determined by the writer. I don't like everything in the Bible, and I can admit that. Even if it is all divinely inspired, I have the right to question something and think critically. OrangeMint (talk) 13:19, 9 February 2016 (UTC)OrangeMint