169 thoughts on “Punching You in the Throat, Giving You a Bad Tattoo, and Ogling Your Cleavage”

    1. Yeah, I just started listening to the video and can’t make out what he’s saying.

      It sounds like “unfeigned faith.” ❓

  1. I’m really really curious as to what this could possibly mean, but I don’t think I’m going to click on it from work.

    In the meantime, though, SFL has to be the only site that pops up sidebar ads for “Meet Thai Women” on one visit, followed by some sort of scantily clad female gaming avatar the next, followed by Liberty University! Truly head-spinning.

    1. I get ads for the Portland Trailblazers which could be because my husband frequents nba.com, specifically for Blazers highlights, etc.
      Sometimes it seems the ads are based on regular internet searches, but then I’ll get an ad targeted for Senior Citizens looking for romance… pretty sure no one in our house is typing that into search. ❓ πŸ˜†

      1. I don’t get stuff for teh Blazers, probably because I’m not interested in basketball. *However*m I bought some jewelery recently from a company that does jewelery, clothes, New Agey stuff, etc, and… adult toys. So guess what is popping up- A LOT- in my ads?

        I… wha???… I don’t even… they’re *that* color??? 😯

    2. I get the ads for my state’s democratic senator running for reelection (I’m a dem donor); for hotels in Sedona (I’ve been shopping for an upcoming vacation); and for random things that are totally unrelated to any searches.

  2. As with many fundy pastors, tattoos and cleavage are sinful but overeating is apparently not.

    1. It’s a sign of just how much God has “blessed” him in his ministry. Unlike the apostle Paul, he has no idea what it is to be in need, hungry or be in want, and that’s all because he believes in the KJV 1611.

    2. Apparently, you have not got the memo. The fundies have informed us on this site on many previous occasions that faulting their preachers for being overweight is not permitted. As with all their rules, this one is imminently reasonable and thus deserving of scrupulous compliance.

        1. Dr Fundystan said,

          Who’s cleavage – his?

          Dr Fundystan, as a doctor, you should know the proper medical term for that is “moobs” πŸ˜†

    3. When I attended PCC I was trying (God knows why now) to link up for summer minisry with the Neighborhood Bible Time people. The leader of the group interviewed us personally. I weighed 215 at the time. He took one look at me and said I’d have to lose weight before I could join his group. No wanting to serve God did not matter my weight did! Some of the guys chosen by him looked great but I knew a few and they were not the kind of guys I’d want representing my ministry. It was soon after this experience I began questioning everything about Fundyland! πŸ˜‰ A year later I would risk God striking me down because I left for a Freewill Baptist College in Oklahoma, and all I heard is how out of the will of God I was going to be from my friends. Funny since I would not truly come to Christ for another 13 years!!!!!!!! This cult is leading people to the pits of hell!! They have a look of godliness, a form of spirituality, but they deny the very one who gives them that power! Jesus too often is neglected in Fundyland for their other idols of worship the KJV, Bible Colleges, Fundy Preachers, Ministry, Christian Schools etc.
      Sorry guess I still have some pain to work through.

      1. Shawn, your comments resonated with me. Often “friends” would speak the way your “friends” spoke to you. So much of life was spent focusing on religion instead of a Savior! I was wondering what years you attended PCC and if the on-campus leader is the one I suspect turned you down for NBT.

  3. “Unfeigned Faith: it’s more than catchphrase theology”

    Should put that on a bumper sticker, its quite a catchy phrase.

    1. After he says the “catchphrase” sentance, he pauses for a while…is this because he expected a aura of of holy reverance to descend on the congregation because of his profound and deeply spiritual statement? Pleeezzzze……

        1. Actually, on second thought, I think that he caught a glimpse of someone’s cross necklace.

  4. Back when I was a fundy, all I ever got–and everyone else who asked hard, honest questions–were catchphrases (The ‘appearance of evil’ one of the bigger ones). And if those didn’t work, then outright scorn.

    Since converting to the Catholic Faith I’ve gotten even more catchphrases from Fundies. ‘Whore of Babylon’ being my personal favorite. I burst into laughter every time I hear it, and the fundy talking to me gets this really sad expression like I just kissed a Calvinist on the lips.

    1. OK, now I can’t stop thinking about kissing Calvinists on the lips, and it’s your fault.

    1. Is he saying that since women have boobs, and boobs create cleavage, women are from the pits of hell? 😯
      I knew fundies can be sexist, but that takes the cake!

    2. Cleavage is from the “pits of hell”? I think there are some newborns out there who would disagree with his assessment of the situation.

      1. Funny ….. for some reason, God thought cleavage was a good thing!

        But Fundies know best, right?

  5. So should we as ” spiritual” people be judging his gluttony, and assume that anything he says is unbiblical, skewed, or blatantly false?

      1. I agree with Persnickety.
        If a fat slob were saying something good and intelligent, I wouldn’t mind, and if a really trim, handsome guy said what Grice says here, I’d find it just as objectionable.

    1. Just out of curiosity, why would we want to be “spiritual”? Everyone who says they want to be spiritual is the type of person who looks for rules to prove how spiritual they are…and they typically fall prey to domineering pastors telling them that their cleavage is sinful and dishonoring to God.

  6. Now that we know what it isn’t, does he conclude with what unfeigned faith is?
    Maybe it is shown by obesity in an ill-fitting suit. That, and a wee bit of proof-texting being all you need to be a most excellent fundy mog.

    1. I had that one the first time as well. Now it’s Cleaver’s Meat Markets….and not it’s Scientology! I did read a Scientology article a little bit ago.

    2. When I looked my ad was for something about cougars and how they don’t play games, and something about finding out for myself…

  7. O geez, another dose of Griceagra.

    And a quick check of a concordance reveals that he was using 2 Tim. 1:5 as his springboard text to jump on the NOTW tats, bracelets and Cross necklaces.

    The Fundy’s ability to make these leaps of logic never cease to amuse me.

    1. It’s very common in many IFB churches for a preacher to take a verse and use it is a springboard to lambast whatever is bothering him this week. While it makes for passionate “preaching”, it is really not expounding what God actually says, and therefore, ultimately, is not edifying to the people in the pew.

      I speak from many years of experience…

      1. And more often than not the verse they use to get there has nothing to do with what they want to talk about at all. The Springboard text is a necessary evil for the IFB pulpiteer.

        That’s the beauty of the 1611 KJV Bible, it is antiquated just enough so that the preachertainer can pick a verse that has a word in it which he can use to launch his sermon with, even if he has to give a “better” explanation of the wording in order to clarify what God’s perfectly preserved word for the English speaking people actually says.

        It’s a great gig for those wanting to build their own reputation, empire, and for preaching IFB moralism.

        It’s a lousy way to present the Gospel and magnify Christ.

      1. O Lord help! If Griceagra affects anyone like viagra they need to see a psychologist immediately! No, no, no… Griceagra was added to the lexicon some time back referring to when the Fundie Moment is right and something about the need for professional intervention should a Grice sermon clip last more than 4 minutes.

        Ewwww, that’s just … eewwww!

  8. β€œUnfeigned Faith: it’s more than catchphrase theology”

    I see what you did there Big Dave.

    Since there’s no use in working too hard on your sermons so you figured you’d fill it with as much catchprhase theology as you could think up.

    1. It’s taught in the Fundy U course entitled “50 Ways to Get Around Preparing for a Sermon.”

  9. Wow. I have been out of the IFB for so long that I forgot how much vitriol they reserve for their evangelical counterparts. Never mind that there is about a 90% overlap in their theology. They hate them some gay-vangelicals.

  10. So if I wear a necklace, and I guy looks at it, and then directs his eyes “elsewhere”, it’s MY fault? BOY it’s so easy to blame men’s sexual sins on women and isn’t that what the IFB movement is all about — belittling women and blaming women for every sin they commit!

    1. IFB men blaming women for lust issues is classic IFB and it’s completely wrong and disturbing. My opinions on this matter are: 1) IFB perpetuates a grossly skewed view of sexuality making innocent, non-sexual things highly sexual and over-dramatized. 2) When excitement is felt to catch a glimpse of a knee or cleavage, instead of viewing it as a normal biological response and respecting the woman not to creepily ogle or lust, blame is placed on the woman for “causing” the biological response because the overwhelming guilt attached to noticing a woman and her womanly features is too great.
      3) Woman are hyper-sexualized and taboo’d in IFB. A dangerous combination making woman prey to abuse and men unable to view women in healthy, normal way.

      1. darn it… it must have accidentally hit Ctrl + Enter! As I was saying, there are the extremes of the cults like the FLDS, the IFB, the Amish, the Hutterites, or whatever other cult you want to name and the way liberal Madonna who wears her underwear on the outside. There is a reasonable, MODEST middle ground that is NOT “sinful” but yet within the IFB is seen as “tempting”. Measuring from your collar bone is a ridiculous thing. Now, as an instructor who often assists students working on computers, I check my to make sure that if I lean over the computer there is no viewing of the “hills”. I use my husband as my tester. Notice I said, I USE — not that I have to seek my husband’s permission. He trusts me because I’ve never given him reason (in 27 years) to question my commitment to our marriage.

        There is a common ground from dressing like a harlot and dressing like you’ve been mummified, but finding that happy medium doesn’t mean that if a man has no restraint it’s the woman’s fault!

        1. No doubt David Grinch blames his obesity on his wife “It’s her cooking! She tempts me! It’s *her* fault I’m a fat slob!”

      1. I’m pretty sure if we all walked around skyclad, there’s be a lot less lusting going on.

        “S/he looks like that?!?!?? Never mind…”

      2. Dude! It’s ten degrees outside, and it doesn’t feel all that warm in here, either. I’m wearing a sweater and a long winter skirt, and I’m still cold. No walking around naked in this weather (or any other–imagination is a powerful aphrodisiac)!

  11. 50$ says that suit is a tear away.

    No Dragonwing14 , no, if a guy bends over and his crack is showing you won’t remember what brand his jeans were. If your necklace is draped over the hills its not a pervert looking at the landscape wherein the gold lieth it is a man. Don’t want crack to show? Pull up pants wear a belt. Don’t like surveyors? Don’t draw attention to the hills. Do and the hills will have eyes.

  12. I think he turned “Unfeigned Faith” in a “catch all” phrase. He can take two words out of the Bible and go wherever he pleases with it and look down his nose at anyone he wants to.

    1. He most likely comes up with a new catch-all phrase each week, bonus if it’s alliterated. As much as they like to keep it simple, they do try to be somewhat versatile in their manipulation game, so one pet phrase isn’t gonna cut it. For example, if someone ever calls bs on his use of ‘unfeigned faith’, he can easily switch to another phrase, like maybe “spirit of rebellion”.

  13. Maybe it’s just me. Maybe it’s just the clips that get posted on this site.


    Why does it seem like these folks love violence so much? Spanking, war, guns, punching people, yelling at specific parishioners, and on and on and on… I mean, come on, does every sermon touch on some kind of violence? Maybe it’s just the that the clips that get selected are particularly outrageous.

    Any thoughts?


      1. Book burnings were very popular in 1930’s Germany. Hmmm “History repeats itself. It has to. Nobody listens.”Steve Turner.

    1. I would be angry too if no matter how hard I preached, how much I talked about God, my “wonderful” marriage, family, life, etc. everything still felt unfulfilled and empty. Obviously, I can not speak to this man specifically since I don’t *know his heart* πŸ˜‰ but in my vast IFB experience, as well as my own life-experience, it is a sad, cruel and unfulfilled life. No matter how many items one checks off the list God is no more real or near and life isn’t sweet like sung in the songs.

      1. You know, I was just thinking about how all my life in the IFB, I felt bad about singing while not really believing songs like “tell me the old, old story…those who know it best seem hungering and thirsting to hear it like the rest”. Now that I’m an evil, liberal, evangelical (gasp), I genuinely love the gospel and understand the desire to think about it all the time.

        I completely agree that being subject to a man-centered, works-based system of sanctification makes for a “sad, cruel, and unfulfilled life”.

        1. Yep; we had our fill of “God doesn’t love you and won’t answer your prayers unless you are “. It was a great, freeing day when I realized that God loves me. Period. I should obey Him to show my love for Him, not win His approval.

        2. It cut out my text — “unless you are (soul-winning/wearing the “right” clothes/tithing/add more stuff)”

      2. This is one of the most accurate description of a life that tries to earn God’s grace that I’ve heard. I can completely identify.

    2. Well, as I’ve mentioned before, the bible is full of violence. God-sanctioned violence. God himself is portrayed as violent. Honestly, for a rebellious, back-talking child, getting a good lickin’ from a paddle is a lot better than the remedy found in Lev. 20:9. Further, we are told that when God didn’t like the way people were acting, he just drowned them all except one family. That’s escalating just a tad more than just punching someone in the throat for an offense.

      And what do we have to look forward to? In the end, the day fundies long for and pray for, anyone not found in the Book of Life will be cast into the Lake of Fire, to burn in agony for eternity. Ah yes, the great winepress of the wrath of God. You will obey, buster, or he will avenge himself on you, so that the smoke of your torment ascendeth up for ever and ever. Straighten up, sinners. God’s gonna get ya!

      So, yeah. This kind of violent attitude has justification, if one takes the bible as the literal, infallible Word of God.

      1. Well, when you become God, let me know. At that point, please feel free to punch, burn, stone or drown whomever you choose. Till that time, however, perhaps you should follow Jesus’ advice on that point. You’ll find that advice in Matthew 5:38-42.


        1. So God gets a pass because he’s God, and we must behave ourselves better than He does? I just don’t, can’t, believe that. I’m not trying to be offensive; just trying to answer honestly, as best as I know how. The only way I have been able to hold onto any faith at all in God is to doubt that the bible is infallible. Strange, unsettling situation, but so it is.

          At any rate, following the Sermon on the Mount is great advice, and I thank you sincerely for that reminder!

        2. Hmmmmm……

          First, let me assure you that I am NOT trying to “sell” you on the Catholic understanding of Scripture. That having been said, let me reccomend two very good youtube videos that address the heart of what you seem to be saying.

          First look up Father Robert Barron’s “Deep Misunderstanding about the Bible.” Then look up “Father Barron Comments on Violence in the Bible.” Both are available on youtube.

          Please remember that I am NOT trying to throw in a plug here for Catholicism. However, I simply can’t make thee points any better than Fr. Barron does. Give those two videos a watch. Let me know what you think.


        3. Thanks for the videos. The Orthodox Church, of which I am still a member however nominally, has a similar position on the bible (if not exactly the same). I hear what you’re saying here, and I hope you know I appreciate it much. Just throwing out some thoughts/questions.

          Taking difficult passages and allegorizing is one “interpretive strategy” that brings peace of mind to many people. It doesn’t, however, for me at least, remove the difficulties.

          Did the events (the flood, the complete annihilation of the Amalekites, for examples) really happen, or not? Is the bible incorrect when it says God did/commanded these things? Is Fr. Barron saying the writers of the bible made all this up, in order to give later readers the opportunity to spiritualize an interpretation that makes God look less cruel? I can see why he would say this, but I think it highly unlikely.

          I agree that different genres must be approached with different “interpretive goggles.” But is it a fair reading of the bible to just take any passage that doesn’t sit well with us and spiritualize it? Who decides what is metaphor and what is historical account? Or maybe the events really happened, but the writers took certain literary liberties in saying that God commanded the slaughter. Again, I see why this is desirable–who wants to worship a God that really does all the bible says he does?

          And his final point, which he makes much of, that we should interpret the bible in the light of the Lamb of Revelation–that same book (which I quoted heavily in my first comment) still makes God look like a blood-thirsty tyrant. (BTW, in the Orthodox tradition the Apocalypse is not that highly regarded. It is never read liturgically; it’s position in the canon was long debated.)

          I agree with Father that if this literal way is the way people read these passages, they are misreading. Father may choose to give lip service to infallibility/inerrancy, but we both choose to selectively read the bible, and we both reject an interpretation that makes God a vicious sadist. On that we happily agree!

          Sorry for rambling, and thanks again for taking the time.

        4. I think any Christian who hasn’t thought deeply about and wrestled mightily with the questions you ask has not thought deeply about these things at all. I know I certainly have. When I was considering the Catholic Church I spent a lot of time reading and asking questions on these very points. Had the answer come back as, “Yes, God kills his enemies by the millions.” I probably wouldn’t be a Christian today. I’m completely unfamiliar with what the Orthodox position might be. Are there any Orthodox theologians you could direct me to on these points?

          I don’t think that Fr Barron is advocating “cherry picking” Scripture and spiritualizing what we don’t like. I think he is saying that 1) we should understand Scripture consistent with the interpretative tradition of the Church. How have these passages been understood over time? But, more importantly, I think he is saying that we need to understand the Bible through the lense of Christ crucified. When God became flesh and dwelt among us, how did he go about setting up his Kingdom? Through force and violence? No. Did he preach armed rebellion against Rome? No. He came as a helpless infant to a poor family in a deserted backwater town, and allowed himself to be tortured and executed for the sake of all humanity.

          As far as specifics? I would say that the flood is divinely inspired allegory. It may have been written as a response to the Gilgamesh epic. In the Gilgamesh epic, the gods decide to flood the earth because humanity is starting to get on their nerves. The hero outwits the gods and saves himself and his family. Contrast that with the story of Noah. God is vexed by sin. God sees his Noah’s righteousness, and prepares a way for Noah and his family to be saved. Just as God prepares a way for us to be saved from sin today. St Peter alludes to this in 1 Peter 3:20-21. The story of Noah, then is a story of God providing to us a means of salvation from sin and it’s consequences.

          All of that having been said, I still struggle with these things, and I’m sure you will too. That’s all part of being human. I think at some point, though, we simply have to realize that until we are united with God (the Orthodox would call this Theosis) there will be things we don’t understand. I think part of growing as a Christian is growing comfortable with mystery.


        5. It seems to me that the Orthodox view of pretty much anything is a little less uniform than what one finds in the Catholic Church. However, I think Fr. Vassilios presents what may be understood as the mainstream Orthodox view in his blog post here.


          Like Fr. Barron, Fr. Georges Florovsky also recommends using the crucified Christ as an interpretive lens in his long essay “Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox View.” It’s available online in several places. (Most of that essay does not deal with the bible per se, but focuses on the bible as it relates to the rest of Tradition. For the Orthodox and the Catholics, the bible does not stand outside of Tradition, as you probably know.)

          I understand the need to allegorize the difficult passages, to sidestep the literal meaning of certain texts, to give primary place to Christ’s love and meekness as a way to challenge the bible’s morally troubling stories. I have done this for years, trying to make sense of things yet retain faith in God. I just got tired of the interpretive gymnastics, I guess.

          For example, when the writer of Proverbs instructs us to beat a child with a rod (because, after all, “he shall not die” if we do so!), are we supposed to say, Oh, that’s not really what he meant, he only meant we should use firm discipline? For me, I prefer to just say, No, that’s wrong. It’s wrong to beat a child. Period.

          Another example. The bible writer says that God himself commanded the annihilation of the Amalekites. Sure, we can lift a spiritualized lesson from this story about the need to eradicate every motion of evil in our hearts. I’m sure the dead Amalekite children would appreciate our allegorical efforts. Or did this event not really happen at all? Either way, something is off here, and no amount of interpretive sidestepping gives me peace of heart.

          For what it’s worth, I am not taking my cues from the New Atheists. I don’t like them. I don’t read them. I think they are the non-believing fundamentalist counterparts of believing fundies. I’m not trying to destroy my faith in God, I’m trying to figure out how to salvage it. Once again, I have rambled far too long (my time as a long-winded Baptist preacher still rears its ugly head from time to time πŸ˜€ ). Thanks again for your kindness, friend, I have enjoyed our conversation.

        6. nico,

          It was nice to converse with you as well. May God bless your journey wherever it leads.


        7. I think it gets back to what is the genre of any particular story in the bible. The middle eastern mind of several thousand years ago had a different frame of reference from the 21st century American-European mindset. Our conclusion about genre may enlighten our view on God’s justice. Inspiration is not an entirely unrelated question.

    3. I think Tithe-check Bouncer made a good point.

      Also, the Bible says that the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, and peace. If these people don’t have the Spirit or have quenched the Spirit, that may be why they have so much anger and hatred.

  14. I heard a real preacher say once that “Judge not, lest ye be judged” is the only Scripture many people know.

    1. If you’re just going to learn one, better that one than one that involves stoning someone to death or massacring whole cities full of people.

    1. I don’t know what he has against cleavage, but next time I see Grice, I’ll try not to look at his, now I that I know it’s an issue for him.

    2. What type of cleavage is your favorite?
      continuous, slaty, crenulation, disjunctive?

      Of course our trust in your opinions on this matter have to take into account that as a proctologist you probably encounter a great deal of the wrong type of cleavage.

  15. “Cleavage … right from the pits of hell”. πŸ™„

    The very first thing that popped into my strange head when I commenced a-viewing this was, “Uncle Fester”. Imagine my disappointment when no glowing light bulbs in his mouth were evidenced.

    David Grice, you are most definitely not of this world. Pray tell, which world are you from?

  16. Would he punch Jesus in the throat for saying “judge not lest ye be judged”? Or just ignore Jesus like he usually does in his sermons?

    1. That’s exactly what I was thinking… JESUS said those words, and you want to punch anyone who says them? Bizarre.

    2. His next misuse of scripture explains the fundy Mog mentality in a nutshell. “The spiritual shall judge all things, yet be judged of no man” – in other words, the Mannogawd can judge everyone beneath him (because they’re nothing but ‘things’), yet is immune from judgement himself.

      1. Sorry, Leo, but JUDGMENT is spelled with only 1 “e” (UNLESS YOU ARE A closet BRITT — then two e’s are acceptable). Not trying to judge you, Dude. Just helping you learn how to spell.

        1. I had a lot of problem with “judgment” because of my KJV reading; it’s “judgement” there, and I became used to seeing it that way; it quite threw me off when judgement was flagged in the browser as misspelled.

  17. I am a little unclear how a tattoo artist could “mess up” and turn the word “Not” into the word “Specifically”….. I love when ignorant people try so hard to be clever

    1. I don’t really know the “notw” tattoo he’s talking about, but he’s only wanting the n changed to an s (sotw), not an entire word, is my understanding.

      1. Still ridiculous. Still pointless. Still judgmental. But I can appreciate your trying to clarify

        1. Yes it’s a very strange thing to be irked about and include in a rant. I can’t explain any of the life choices that end up with David Grice doing & saying what David Grice does & says. πŸ™‚

      2. I don’t see how “NotW” or “notw” means much of anything — it could be “Not Weird” or anything.

      3. “Notw” might mean “not of this world.” It’s a Christian apparel company that caters to Christians that fundies love to hate.

    2. Either way, maybe he’s praying that the tattoo artist is made to mess up… by a spirit? By the Holy Spirit?

  18. After watching this sad, strange, pitiable man, one of the suggested videos was entitled, “Giant Open Sore!”

    Wow. That is related: they both dredge up similar feelings of disgust & revulsion.

    1. “You are a sad strange little man, and you have my pity” – Said Buzz Lightyear to the Mog as he spouted off about throat punching, tattoos, cleavage, the KJV only, and what not.

  19. Dear David Grice:

    OK big boy! Since you’re the great theologian of the hour, now is your chance to explain to us the nature of the hypostatic union. Or failing that, there is this hapax legomenon I’d like you to explain.

    Christian Socialist

    1. Dear Christian Socialist,

      While we might question this man’s theological knowledge based on his preaching, the fact is, no one can explain the hypostatic union. We can provide a definition, but how can anyone explain the infinite occupying the finite?

      Just my 2 cents worth.

  20. I believe you can cut off his air supply by shoving a rock into the hole on the back of his neck.

    For my Whovian friends.

    1. Excellent idea. We could also push him down some stairs. (He does kinda look like a pink dale).

  21. I’m sure bunches of stuff could be said about the whole clip. I wouldn’t know, because I kind of went into a stupor watching a preacher MOCK THE WORDS OF JESUS from the pulpit. He put on a funny voice, and made fun of words spoken by Jesus himself. And then said it makes him want to punch people. After hearing that, I lost by ability to think rationally for the rest of the video.

      1. It was a strange and sad show to watch.

        Stupid video. I’m not sure how a MOG is going to see a cross in someone’s cleavage, or how it’s from the pits of hell, but I’m not going to ponder those possibilities. I guess he didn’t follow the doctrine of not putting any wicked things before his eyes.

        Didn’t get any interesting Youtube links aside from one of Standridge (telling us what he thinks of the sound guy, texting, and Europe, among others).

    1. Yeah, the disconnect between mocking the “judge not lest ye be judged” phrase then moving directly to judging people who choose to have a tattoo is pretty unbelievable. Because there’s no way someone with a “NOTW” tattoo (which I’ve never ever seen, BTW) could be a Christian. πŸ™„

  22. Am I the only one who thinks that the Rev David Grice looks almost exactly like Mayor Rob Ford of Toronto?

    They both need a pair of ManSpanxx.

    1. If only Grice had Ford’s justification– “I was in a drunken stupor when I did (said) it.”

  23. Unfeigned faith is not making a list of things that irritate you then wandering around a platform spouting that list.
    (So he wants to punch people in the throat who judge him [watch out SFL!], is really jealous that his catchphrases aren’t in demand as tattoos, and he wants you to tweet him a picture of the Cross and the Cleavage. For visuals. To show people what to avoid.)

  24. Funny thing is I agree with him on mocking people with shallow, bumper-sticker faith, but oh holy cow does he go about it ass-backwards. Mocking the “judge not” scripture…the one scripture fundies need over all others, IMO, is frightening. And when when when will these guys get over the fear of women’s boobs??? Who knew I was toting around double-barreled kryptonite??

  25. Because Jesus said the greatest commandment was to throat punch people you don’t like. Also please stop staring at my cleavage. You wouldn’t even know I had a cross necklace if you weren’t looking. Sad sad man, more worried about what I look like than the condition of my heart.

    1. But don’t we have to look at your cleavage in order to see your heart–I mean it’s in the way, lol.

  26. This is IFB 101…if you want to get noticed, say the most outlandish things possible. In Fundydom, those who would dare preach to love one’s neighbor as themselves would immediately be marginalized (if their father was a hard-core MOG before them) or ostracized (everyone else). It is at the point that hearing an MOG espouse an orthodox thought would be the exception to the rule…

  27. Totally unrelated to this post, I cannot log into the forum this morning. Anyone else having this problem?

  28. Someone saying, “Judge not, lest ye be judged” makes him say, “If that doesn’t make you want to punch someone in the throat, I don’t know what does.”

    Ummmm, vile insults against someone I love? Child abuse? Sex trafficking? Not that I’ve ever punched anyone, but I can think of a lot better reasons than someone quoting a Bible verse in a situation where I don’t think it applies.

  29. Typical IFB dribble – take a verse/text and depart therefrom…use a verse to preach against all the sins (fill in the blanke here) I don’t like.

    Funny, he’s preaching against catch phrases…and he seems to be using “unfeigned faith” as a …catchphrase.

    Priceless 😯

  30. So, if the cross necklace is drawing attention to a woman’s cleavage, what is his necktie drawing attention to? πŸ™„

Comments are closed.