Reply With Quote
You believe it was "perfectly logical" to come to all of these conclusions:
I think you're confused.
Westboro is just bluffing; in the beginning they were able to generate enough media attention to make the protests worth their while because no one knew who they were. But now the counter protesters outnumber them and the media stories are all focused on that. They threatened to protest at the memorial services for the Boston victims and the West victims too but never showed up.
Of course they knew the Prez anti-Christ would also be in attendance, so they may have been too scared of a good smote! Or a good smoting? Eh I don't know how to say it
You believe it was "perfectly logical" to come to all of these conclusions:
I think you're confused.
I found the answer via teh google.
Turns out you're wrong, fwiw.
Step back for a minute.
Third time asking: are you a Christian?
It's possible. Which part? Was Jesus alive in the OT?
I've answered this before. And what business is it of yours what I do or do not believe?
You are talking about slavery as those practiced in the 15th century of abuses, but the Bible talks about slavery as a form of servitude. Yes, people were owned for a specific number of years, but they were also guaranteed their basic human rights. Some of them were to be set free after a number of years, be provided with wages and basics of living. Almost like a contract that you are bound to. It does not allow slaves to be beaten, neglected and abused.Nice question dodge, ambchang. I am not reading the entire Bible. Please, explain to me how slavery can be okay.
And how am I brainwashed? All that is actually in the Bible, and I could have used the Skeptic's Annotated Bible to make my point, but chose not to.
You didn't address the points I made, by the way.
Andat you equating extreme atheists to extreme theists, then acknowledging how stupid your point was.
I am not exactly sure where I acknowledged my own point being stupid. Perhaps you can explain it.
And seriously, what is your motive? Will you be converted when your arguments have been quashed? Will you expect others to convert when you won with your arguments? Are you here to show how intellectually superior you are by picking out inconsistencies where you felt exists in a Bible without even reading the whole thing?
If you want to critic something, study it, you are supposed to know the entire context, instead of taking a few sentences out of context discovered by other people, regurgitate it, and act like you are smarter than everyone.
Also, perhaps you can look up the actions of "Vetenskap & Folkbildning" and try to justify them.
why dont you just answer yes or no, got damn
The majority of Christians in this country oppose same sex marriage, it's by no stretch of the imagination some small group of Christian extremists who oppose it (if that were the case, we wouldn't have had a Democratic president in the 1990's who signed DOMA as a means of pandering).
38% of this country also denies climate change, which is another thing I blame on Christianity.
Do any of you Christians read the content of your holy book?
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
So, add ambchang to the long list of Christians who have no idea what they are talking about.
That wasn't in response to you, obviously.I am not exactly sure where I acknowledged my own point being stupid. Perhaps you can explain it.
And seriously, what is your motive? Will you be converted when your arguments have been quashed?
Probably not.Will you expect others to convert when you won with your arguments?
Are you here to show how intellectually superior you are by picking out inconsistencies where you felt exists in a Bible without even reading the whole thing?
If you want to critic something, study it, you are supposed to know the entire context, instead of taking a few sentences out of context discovered by other people, regurgitate it, and act like you are smarter than everyone.
There is no context in which keeping slaves is okay. There is no context in which killing an unruly child is okay. There is no context where forcing a woman to marry her rapist is okay. Period. I'm not going to read the entire Bible, then delude myself into thinking it isn't full of inconsistencies and bad teachings.
I don't work for them and I have never heard of them, so why would I feel the need to justify their actions?Also, perhaps you can look up the actions of "Vetenskap & Folkbildning" and try to justify them.
Not exactly sure how the climate change issues can be tied to Christianity, but that is another matter.
As for the opposition to same-sex marriage, what is wrong with that? If you have issues with it due to the tax issue, it is the matter of the government setting the tax laws. I doubt Christians go into the same sex marriage issue thinking that they want to financially penalize same sex couples through taxes rather than their own views on the meaning of marriage itself. In fact, you are saying the government is evil for applying different tax rules to different groups of people. Why would married couple even have a tax break vs. unmarried couples?
Christianity in itself is against same sex marriage, it is also against lying, hatred and greed. But I have never heard of any Christian based laws financially penalizing people who bear false witness. How people and governments use and interpret those basic principles to set laws is the matter of those individuals and governments, and not of those of the religion.
And
And my point was how typical the hive mentality is with your kind that you can see your response from a mile away.
And what's the point? You've been here years with this same schtick of going into religion threads and contradicting the out of everyone who counterpoints you. We've done this dance before and I'm not going to get sucked into it again.
I would be the first to say that I do not entirely understand Christianity, and I am not exactly sure how that is an issue, because I doubt there is one single person who understands the entire context of their beliefs, theist or not.
However, to address your point, this passage was part of a larger passage of how to treat murder and manslaughter. It is a rule used to discourage/stop people from beating their slaves, and there are many other passages that talks about the rights of a slave. There are passages immediately after the one you quoted of talking about freeing a slave after abuses, as slaves were taken back then either through capturing from war (would have been dead otherwise) or through payment of debt (no laws governing their treatment prior to these passages, leading to abuses.
So you are saying that even if you are logically proven to be wrong, you would not convert? So what's your point of quoting all those logic that you had earlier on?That wasn't in response to you, obviously.
Again, what is your point/purpose/motivation?
How would you know? Have you read the entire thing, or did you just spend a lot of time reading on one side of the fence?
And no, never said it was your fault, just pointing out your logical fallacies.
So you have already made up your mind that reading a few sentences out of a rather thick book is enough to understand those few sentences, and that you are actively criticizing a subject you have very little knowledge on. I suppose there is no point in arguing then, as you clearly do not have any indication of listening to arguments that do not align with your built in biases and ignorance of the subject.
There is no context in which keeping slaves is okay. There is no context in which killing an unruly child is okay. There is no context where forcing a woman to marry her rapist is okay. Period. I'm not going to read the entire Bible, then delude myself into thinking it isn't full of inconsistencies and bad teachings.
I don't work for them and I have never heard of them, so why would I feel the need to justify their actions?
I didn't quite understand why evangelicals were in such a stubborn state of denial climate change until recently, but iirc it has something to do with Noah's Ark. I think.
The way you're pretending that the government's laws are completely splintered/can't be blamed on Christian values is intellectually dishonest. If Christians simply opposed gay marriage at the Church level and not at the state level, I wouldn't care. No one is saying Churches have to start respecting same sex marriage. When the majority of Christians say they think gay marriage shouldn't be legal, they're inherently saying gay couples should receive unfair tax treatment as that's a byproduct of gay marriage being illegal. Whether it's actually something they want or it's simply ignorance of the tax code (which is inexcusable since you should be well educated on the advantages/disadvantages to marriage if you have a strong opinion as to how it should be defined), gay couples currently pay up to 60% more in taxes than straight couples.
As for why married couples should have a tax break vs. unmarried couples, it's a different issue but something I agree 100% with Christians on. This country has an abundance of kids raised in unstable single parent homes when there's tons of evidence that makes it clear kids receive the best upbringing when his/her parents are married. Getting married and having a stable family is behavior that should be encouraged.
Again, if religion was completely splintered from the government and it's laws, I wouldn't give a .
Maybe if all your arguments weren't terrible, the discussion would take a different turn.
God bless these great brave Heroes. More people should have the courage to stand up for The Lord
Maybe if all your arguments weren't terrible, the discussion would take a different turn.
You don't discuss. All you do is belittle and condescend. And you're so bent at your agenda that "discussion" is not possible with you.
I think this implies that he is saying that he was "I am".John 8
56*Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
57*Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58*Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.
If he wasn't, then what exactly is Jesus? A man or God?
In what context is it ok to kill sexuals?
You seem upset. Why?
And my point was how typical the hive mentality is with your kind that you can see your response from a mile away.
You seem upset. Why?
And my point was how typical the hive mentality is with your kind that you can see your response from a mile away.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
