Total posts: 3,520
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Where do Jesus and I start with your outright Bible stupidity AGAIN?! The passages in question that were inspired by Jesus support the title of my thread are in fact, in how to get a wife!!!
So you got nothing then?
Here you go again in thrashing Jesus’ direct inspired words as shown in my initial post of this thread in how assumed Christian men in how to get a wife!
Ditto. Not a thing.
Well since you have nothing to offer then I accept your concession. Thanks for playing.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
I think you misunderstand.
Thanks for your response. And yes, you have done well. From your response I perceive are an atheist. Although I may be incorrect. I am sure you will CONFIRM it so we all that have "knowledge" and then the truth will set us free. LOL! Yes, my little joke. Regrettably, I have not understood you. But let us proceed to see where we arrive.
We have reality - as it is, this is the truth of how things are, you are absolutely correct that what is true, is true irrespective of us.
I am not identifying reality with truth. That is what you indicated and I disagreed. Reality is subjective. Truth is not. Truth is true irrespective of what we think of it or what our own reality tells us. Reality however for the sake of the discussion must be our connection.
Then we have knowledge - which is our ability to confirm that something is true or not.
Knowledge may or may not inform or confirm truth. It really depends upon what kind of knowledge, informed or uninformed, total or partial. The basis of this topic was about ascertaining the different types of knowledge we use to come to truth. This is why I set the thread to make people consider the types of knowledge we have, how we come to those places of knowledge, and then to seek further how it impacts or influences our understanding of truth.
Don’t confuse truth with knowledge. They are completely different, but related things.
Yes. I understand that they are different. Hence my thread.
There is a closed box with a random number in it. You guess that the box has the number 9 written in it. That’s not knowledge - that’s a guess.
On what kind of knowledge am I basing this guess? Is it rational? Using probability methodology? Or logic by reason of deduction? It is pure guesswork or speculation based on a feeling? Or did I put my hand on the box and touch it or taste it or smell it? Did I use my experience? The last number was nine therefore this one is going to be nine as well. A pure guess - if that is possible is or may be knowledge but not knowledge of the specific number. Obviously you have knowledge of a box. You have knowledge that there is a number in the box. You are not devoid of knowledge. And furthermore what is the point of knowing the number in the box. For the record - it is a poor analogy to compare it to religion.
You open the box; and it has the number 9 in it. You’ve confirmed the truth and can now say you “know” what was in the box; but your guess was still a guess - you did not “know” what was in the box before it was opened.
Well actually, no you have not confirmed that there is a number 9 is in the box. You have not confirmed anything at all. You are making many assumptions within that sentence. Firstly, that you have the ability to open a box. That the box is able to be opened. That the number you see in there is the same number that was in there when you made your guess. That your understanding of the number 9 is the same as the one who put it into the box. That you are actually mentally healthy enough to see with your eyes or even see the nine in the first place. That the principles of logic are true. The most you can confirm from opening the box - if you are able to do - is to say that what you see with your eyes right in front of you is the number nine. And that is if you appreciate and know that this is a nine in the first place.
Yes, I understand what you are trying to say. That now that you see it with your own eyes, you can confirm it is true. So indeed you are not a rationalist but in fact an empiricist. Unless you can see it with your own eyes, you won't believe it. Truth comes from experience - not from reason. Ironically though you are using reason to prove your experience is the basis of your knowledge which leads to truth. Hmm. Just to clarify. Reason - is not the same as experience.
The process of confirmation is what makes something knowledge.
You are suggesting that the scientific method is the means to ascertaining knowledge and therefore truth. Truth only comes through the scientific method. Well except this statement you are making which is not the scientific method - but is a principle of reason or logic. Scientific methodology and Logic are the not same thing. The scientific method uses logic true. Yet the scientific method never proved logic in the first place - but rather made the assumption that logic is self evident. Clearly going against the notion of knowledge. Hmm.
Likewise, if I had a camera recording of someone putting a 9 into the same box; then I can say I know that the box contains a 9. I have confirmed what was in the box before it was opened.
Well with all of the above assumptions possibly. How do you the video was not doctored? How do you know that the number the guy recorded is the same number in the box? How do we know that the number in the box does not change every second? How do you know that the number nine in the box is not actually a 6? You have not confirmed its truth. You are still giving a best test - and probably with a high degree of confidence. But still not confirming the truth of the matter.
Imagine the number was chosen at random without anyone being able to see what it was; it goes in the box, then everything is burned to ashes. There was definitely a truth of what was in the box - but we can never know what it was; as there is no way of being able to confirm it.
If we had a time machine we could? How was the number placed into the box? Is it on paper or does it just magically float in the air? Was the paper part of a book or just a random piece picked up of the floor? Was it written on with a pencil or generated by a computer? Again, how do we know that the number in the box does not change every second?
I understand you are trying to indicate that truth exists apart from knowledge or confirmation by humans. I agree with that. That is indeed the reason I started this thread. I am not mixing truth up with knowledge. I am asking about the different types of knowledge people use to come to truth.
Indeed, regardless of what is true or not; the only thing that functionally matters to us is knowledge - the ability to confirm what is true by checking it against reality.
I don't agree with that position. Truth matters whether we are aware of it or not. Truth matters whether or not I am impacted by it or not. Truth matters whether you can confirm it or not. You may never confirm that God exists - but that won't change the truth about God or how it will impact you after death or even in life.
In this respect there is no “truth” or “religious truth” just truth. And there is no “knowledge” or “religious knowledge” - only that which you can confirm is true.
Like I said, I don't agree. Your assumptions are all over the place. You are using logic and reason to suggest that empiricism is the way to understand truth. That is a mixed use of knowledge basis. You use one to justify truth and then use the other to justify truth. And interestingly enough without a fixed point of reference you cannot consistently talk about truth or use reason. In other words you are being arbitrary.
Interestingly enough, many religious folk have opened up the box and confirmed their god. Just because you cannot figure how to open the box is a problem with your assumptions, not with religious truth.
What “religious knowledge” is, is a group of people getting together and professing loudly that they believe with all their heart that the box contains the number 48391, that people have had visions and experiences of it containing that number. With other groups claiming it contains the number 3628 for exactly the same reasons, and others still saying 9492.
Well respectfully, that is no different to the scientific methodology. Why is it that peer group reviewed scientific articles cannot be repeated in over 70% of cases? Why is it that the half life of knowledge for engineers is 10 years. And for doctors 5 years. And for scientists even less? Because all of them are guessing, educated guesses, but still guesses. Why? Because they don't use consistent knowledge basis. Like you they run from logic to experience and then back to logic. Religious knowledge is done in similar ways. I personally don't think we should put God into a box. Or in a test tube for that matter.
These Boxists come into Boxism forums and loudly process that their belief and their ideas should be counted as knowledge, that we aboxists must agree that the box contains 48391, and that their agreement is not a guess because they all agree on it, and have all experiences something that tells them it is so; that somehow their guess is special because of their collective belief, and that if somehow holds some special deeper truth even though they have no ability to show what is really in the box.
An argument from authority is not the best argument. A consensus of scientists might agree - but that does not make them correct. It does not automatically make them wrong either. But it is still an argument of authority. No different to religious people referring to their sacred text.
Until you open the box, or have the ability to test and validate what is in the box, and confirm what is in the box; what these groups are saying is “belief”, it is not “knowledge”.
No I disagree. I do not agree that seeing something and touching something and smelling something automatically and always and even confirms the truth.
It might. But it might also get it wrong. Every day, I see with my eyes, the sun rise and the sun move across the sky and then it sets. Are my eyes and my experience lying or is my perspective and thinking wrong? When I jump up and down, do I land in the same spot or do I move along a little bit at the speed of the earth's rotation? Is my experience and my eyesight and touch wrong or is my understanding about immaterial things off course? Knowledge can help confirm things - but only so far. My knowledge might be misinformed? I might listen to consensus of the scientists who are telling me pre - Galileo that the world is the centre of the world or I might choose to look at the world with a different perspective?
Thanks for letting us know you are an evidentialist. Or an empiricist. Or even an experientalist. But not a person of reason.
If of course you think that both reason and experience are your basis - I would love to read your epistemology for how you arrived at that conclusion? Or that truth?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
It's your sore point Brother.
Not mine. I am not the one running away from my past of being hurt by the church and its clergy or leaders. This is why you are so fixated not just on sexual gender and hating the God of the Bible, but also on "running away".
The past is catching up with you though. I suggest you let it catch up - so that you can deal with it. Now is the time. Don't let your past continue to eat you alive.
Stop running. Stop hiding in false personas. Stop blocking out the good things in this world. Stop fighting against the truth. Embrace it. And deal with it before it destroys you completely.
PM if you need.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
1. Tell the membership in how I allegedly "baited pseudo christians" like you by giving them the actual inspired by Jesus direct words as biblically shown?
Baiting is defined as "deliberately annoy or taunt (someone)" baiting meaning - Bing.
You stated falsely "Shown below as the inspired word of our particular chosen God of the Bronze and Iron Age, Jesus the Christ, is how to get a proper wife, praise!" and then quoted some verses which have nothing to do with marriage. That is baiting. You know that Christians don't think this is how you they ought to get a wife. You know that Christians use interpretational methods. And yet you intentionally baited them by quoting verses which are irrelevant for Christian marriages. You did it to bait and to taunt and to mock. Not because this is how Christians find wives, but because you dislike the bible and its God and you can't figure out why Christians don't see God as evil as you do.
2. You have the audacity to say that passages that are inspired by Jesus in question are now considered baiting pseudo-christians?!!
I have the gumption to call you out for being stupid and deliberately provocative. And therefore I also have the gumption of not needing to address your foolishness. Everyone of those verses have a specific meaning which has godly intent. I don't move away from that one bit. Yet it is obviously not talking about how to find a wife.
3. Show the membership a few examples of passages inspired by Jesus within the scriptures that are NOT baiting them, and therefore following what Jesus said in this passage: " Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth." (1 John 3:18)
"At the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem, they sought the Levites in all their places." Nehemiah 12:27a. That is intentionally vague. Why? Because every very in the bible is the same. Read in context - they don't bait. They are words. Words that can refute. Instruct in righteousness. Correct. Etc. but not bait - unless you take them out of context and try and put a Brother Thomas spin on them.
4. You are you trying to embarrass Jesus by stating that the passages in question that exist as shown are unworthy, of which goes directly against this passage: “EVERY word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5)
Addressed above. in 1 and 2 and 3.
5. Where do you get the authority to say what is baiting pseudo-christians, and what is not? Do you know more than Jesus' direct words as you make fun of Him in this manner, and as you go against this passage: “Do not let any un
I am not a pseudo christian. You are. In fact, you are not even that. You are an atheist. And a very hurt one at that. I suspect formerly catholic, which is why picked up the moniker of Brother. And one suspects further that based upon your fixation on sexual deviancy and other such gender issues that the offence against you probably had something to do with Catholic priests. This probably provides us with a working hypothesis of why you have such hatred towards God and Christianity. And why you desire to mimic and mock them - because why would God let that happen to you - unless he was as evil as you think he was?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Oh - it looks like I hit a sore point!!!!!
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Tradey, I have a great idea! Since you are in my thread where the subject is: For Single Christian Men that are looking for a wife, and you always want others to stay upon the topic of said thread, how about you discussing the main topic! I know, this is something new for you to do as your SILENCE upon said topic is not forthcoming, but at least "try," okay? Thanks.
You brought me to this topic. I intentionally remained away because it was obviously you baiting Christians.
Yet, I am here and you for a rarity make a fair point. So I will respond even as I did in the other post about religion and Louisiana. Notably, you have not responded to that post.
1. Have you or other pseudo-christians ever followed Jesus' inspired words in "how to get a wife" as shown in my initial post of this thread?
I can't speak for any pseudo-christian. the only one I know is you. So given I am not a pseudo christian I really am not obligated to answer this question. Yet because you have asked me - I will have to assume that you are asking me as a christian and not a pseudo christian. Otherwise there is no reason for me to answer.
Firstly, I disagree that these are Jesus' principles for Christians to get married. So the answer is no. I have not followed your erroneous suggestions of means of finding a wife. These are simply your interpretation - of verses taken out of context used by you to justify your anger and hatred of God.
2. Which one of Jesus' "how to get a wife" did you like the best?
since I disagree that this is about how to find a wife principle - I would suggest that I only need to decline to answer.
3. Were there any of the examples of "how to get a wife" that Jesus proposed you didn't like?
Again, since this is not a list of anything but Brother's methods of getting a wife, and certainly not the way Jesus directs for us to get a wife, I choose to decline to answer.
4. Now, if you are married, and to be godly, did you ever use any of the propositions of "how to get a wife" since you are an "alleged" male, which as shown in other posts, you are not sure of this fact?
It is irrelevant and none of your business whether I am married or not, but in the hypothetical notion I am or would be married I acted in accord with Jesus real principles in the NT.
5. For you to be a pseudo-christian at best, have you sent this thread to other men in helping them in "how to get a wife?"
Again, I respond not a pseudo - christian but as a christian. You are the only pseudo christian on this site. And one that needs serious mental health help.
Answered. Please answer my questions about your past. When did you stop being a christian? Which denomination did you belong to. I am guessing it was a cult of some description - possibly the JW or perhaps the Mormons. Or perhaps scientology. Mebbe pentecostal. Why did you leave? Was it because you discovered you were gay? Or perhaps had gender questions?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
And you have been banned because you were a nice bloke and did not nothing wrong. The way I heard you whine about in the past is that you were banned because of others. Ironic how you are innocent but Ethan MUST be guilty.
Created:
-->
@Ramshutu
It all depends on what you consider to be “truth”.
Sorry, I am not a relativist. Truth is truth irrespective of what I think it is.
If you think what is “true” is “what is concordant with reality”, then you can only “know” something is true if you can show it matches reality.
Truth is concordant with reality. But that is not what makes it truth. Truth is far deeper than just being in accord with reality. Whether I know something to be true or not does not change the nature of whether something is true per se. In fact, my understanding of truth may well not be truth. Hence my understanding is not the basis of truth either. Yet it is possible to know truth.
Your definition seems to be a rational explanation of truth. With a subjective element attached to it.
That implies religious “truth” you can’t confirm can’t be considered knowledge.
How does one confirm religious truth - except by itself? Indeed if it is confirmed by some other measure then there is no religious truth.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Yes, so sad really.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
don't forget to mention your favorite little fairy tale.Which is what exactly?
You know the one you really love to read and get excited about. The secret gospel of ... ?????
Created:
-->
@Stephen
No. Threads are not monopolised by one person - even if they start it.
And the thread is not just about anything. You clearly put a topic down - and that is the topic. It is about God and Mary. Not about JTB.
So you ought to stick to the thread or leave.
Your problem is that you started a thread based on a lie - and now you have nothing more to say about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
That does not make him a sex pest. Duh!
In fact you and the Brother are more sex pests that Ethang. You clearly both homophobes - even though you are both anti-christian and pro - relative morality.
The irony is gobsmacking really. Yet, there you have it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
@BrotherDThomas
You can continue your little game. I have stated repeatedly I am a male. That is what I am, it is what I have always been and it will be what I will always be.
The ironic thing is I don't have an issue per se with transgender.
It is both of you - the fake atheist and the fake theist who seem to think it is fun to make fun about genderism.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
That is not true though, many corporations open up there especially as the policies surrounding dirt cheap factory running costs since there's almost 0 health and safety enforcement, meaning the conditions can be as bad and cheap as possible without any compensation for injured or even dead workers (who died from overwork or on-site accident). It is an absolute haven for that and is why almost everything is at least in part 'made in China' these days.
Foreigners can't buy property in China. It is not free trade. I don't agree with the assessment by Forbes. China's riches are in the cities, not in the villages. Poverty is still rampant in the country. It is a lot like Singapore. It hides its poor - it can't be seen to be failing. Don't believe all the propaganda you read.
Corporations can do many things without buying property. Capitalism requires private property and property rights to succeed. It also requires an underlying moral system. America is no longer really capitalist either. It has had its day. Now it is living on the inheritance of its parents.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Hmm some people are pretty dense.
But you shouldn't be too hard on Stevie Blunder. He can' help it. LOL!
Created:
-->
@ethang5
TS, if you're supposed to be "running away", how come you keep responding and asking DeeDee to stay on topic? If you were running away, wouldn't you just not respond? Or respond like DeeDee does, -with unrelated nonsense in a spam template?Well Ethang, I think it has something to do with the fact that DeeDee is unable to concentrate for very long.Dee Dee has the concentration of a 3 year old.Have you noticed every post he posts is almost identical?Everyone has. DeeDee posts using a template given to him by his loony "church". He isn't allowed to deviate from it.He has the capacity to grab one line, sometimes two, that someone else says - and very often fails to understand that line - and then makes a comment.Every one of his "church" members is exactly the same way. Find any of them online and you would swear it was DeeDee.Most of his posts end up saying - "next" or begin or something like that.That's the template. They told him he would be mowing down Christians left and right, so his "next!" is supposed to be like the hero saying "next!" after he's knocked out one bad guy. Too bad for him no one is lining up to engage his loony posts.I opine - this is because his concentration has run out already or he has to push people out of the door because it is too hard for him or because he has nothing to add. In fact when I think about it- I can't recall the last time DeeDee has actually provided anything new. There is that new thread - but I reckon that is just a rehashed one of an old post he did years ago. Just ripped of the Katrina name and repasted. I feel bad for him you know. Obviously, something is going on. I have tried to press him, but he won't reveal.His "church" doesn't allow them to be real people. Years locked in an idiot parody! Can you imagine how low his IQ must be for him to still be satisfied in that clown suit?It is his prerogative. I guess we will have to wait and see how much longer he goes. but I have a bad feeling about him. He does live in the world's hot spot for Covid and mental health problems.It's nice that you care, but I suspect DeeDee doesn't interact much with people in real life.
The thing is Ethang, I do care about the Brother. For me, religion is a positive thing and he hates it so much it is eating away at his ego and his mental health state. Let me also qualify what I mean about religion. Not all religion is positive. Yet the Brother's anti- everything stance is really starting to hurt him. Have you noticed the fact that his posts are getting fewer and fewer and with even less interaction. I almost wonder whether we need to send someone around to do a welfare check.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
China is not capitalistic in any manner. It denies ownership of private property. Its government is the Communist Party.
For Capitalism to succeed as a free market requires non-authoritarian governments.
To say they mimicked is itself a denial of reality.
Fascism only came about in the 20th Century. Monarchism existed prior to fascism. Fascism exists due to Karl Marx and Hegel and the rejection of organized religion. There were forms of or types of fascism before the 20th Century - but only as similar as mercantilism is to capitalism. People put convenient tags on things without properly identifying the significant differences.
Hitler and Stalin cooperated at the beginning of WW2 not because they were similar - but were competitors. That is the trade mark of fascist and communist societies - they destroy everything else. That is their end game - and whatever it takes to get there- is ok. If that means China has to be nice for a while - ok. Hitler did the same thing.
The journey is just AS important as the destination. This is why democracy - at least theoretically is still the best of a bad lot. Every society is a theocracy - it really is a matter of what kind? Is it a communist theocracy - or a fascist one - or a Muslim one or a Hindu one or a secular one or a Christian one.
Hence - I am suggesting that religion is the basis of all worldviews and that theology determines philosophy. Not the other way around. My ex-philosophy lecturer disagreed with this and said it is wrong. He was a Christian as well - for a while. But eventually turned into the one of the more fundamentalist atheists I know, leaving his wife and kids - without a penny.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
TS, if you're supposed to be "running away", how come you keep responding and asking DeeDee to stay on topic? If you were running away, wouldn't you just not respond? Or respond like DeeDee does, -with unrelated nonsense in a spam template?
Well Ethang, I think it has something to do with the fact that DeeDee is unable to concentrate for very long. Have you noticed every post he posts is almost identical?
He has the capacity to grab one line, sometimes two, that someone else says - and very often fails to understand that line - and then makes a comment. Most of his posts end up saying - "next" or begin or something like that.
I opine - this is because his concentration has run out already or he has to push people out of the door because it is too hard for him or because he has nothing to add. In fact when I think about it- I can't recall the last time DeeDee has actually provided anything new. There is that new thread - but I reckon that is just a rehashed one of an old post he did years ago. Just ripped of the Katrina name and repasted. I feel bad for him you know. Obviously, something is going on. I have tried to press him, but he won't reveal. It is his prerogative. I guess we will have to wait and see how much longer he goes. but I have a bad feeling about him. He does live in the world's hot spot for Covid and mental health problems.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
You don't need me Brother. You need to repent of your sins and stop being such a dill. Embrace the Lord Jesus and he will set you free from the past, the present and the future.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
I know.Its about the things god seemed to have omitted to tell Mary his mother. And Its about all the things that his mother Mary was promised about here son and god failed and had forsaken both Mary and Jesus - for which there actually IS bible evidence from the lips of Jesus himself. And that would include him inheriting the throne of David and becoming king, but nowhere does it say that Jesus was ever anointed king by John the baptist for which YOU claim there is "clear evidence" that he was. So lets see your "clear biblical evidence".Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”YEP, god certainly turned his back on his own boy and the "blessed among women" his mother Mary didn't he , you clown?Luke 1:32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David.Off you go now. And don't forget that " clear evidence " or don't come back.
This thread is Not about JTB. It's about your belief - based on nothing but silence in the bible that God did not tell Mary everything about Jesus life and death. Naturally and for the record, God did not tell Mary EVERYTHING about Jesus. He told her enough for her to be satisfied. Similarly God told Elizabeth that JTB would be Jesus' servant. Luke 1:76. It is amusing how you speculate about what is NOT said to Mary but ignore what JTB's own mother knew about her son.
Matthew 2:2 also indicated that Jesus was not just a future king, but one who was born king. Hence why the Magi came to WORSHIP him. Even they recognized his kingship and indeed his deity. People don't worship kings. They might bow down to them. They might even revere the great ones. But worship is reserved for deity.
I have also demonstrated elsewhere Jesus' anointing. I nonetheless TODAY cannot be bothered. You seem happy and content to let your own thread be distracted. Just remember you have set the precedent.
But we are still waiting for your EVIDENCE for your thread. I don't expect it will ever be forthcoming - since for the most part you are ignorant. Yet we can all be hopeful.
Your interpretation of the above verses is tantamount to evidence of your own ignorance and uneducation. I don't know of any credible theologian who would interpret that in the manner that you have. A simplistic reading perhaps - but not one who actually understands Psalm 22. Your interpretation is the difference between the disciples on the road to Emmaus prior to meeting the Resurrected Christ and once they understood.
Created:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
@Stephen
That may be true for some? But not myself, Witch. I believe the bible to have much historicity to it and believe many of the biblical characters to have existed, minus the so called miracles.
don't forget to mention your favorite little fairy tale. you know. the one where there is an underlying secret message for those who are "magical" enough to see it. wow! Talk about an entire new version of the "emperor's clothes".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
Well, well, you are still alive.
Where have you been? If you want people to stop accusing you of being fake, stop following the lead of Stevie Blunder and Brother DTs.
What question do you want me to answer ? I'm sure I've answered all of yours.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
It is the religious right-wing that invented censorship and fake news both.
You have heard of China, haven't you? And the former Soviet Union? And gee just about every left wing government?
what nonsense you spout.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
1. Do you think that Jesus’ hurricane “Ida” is appropriate enough for the continued sinning of the state of Louisiana and within the city of New Orleans, as shown within my initial post shown in the above link?2. Do you think that Jesus should have brought forth a level 6 hurricane, which is unheard of at this time, but in Jesus being our serial killing Yahweh God incarnate, He could bring forth such a forceful hurricane to really devastate and kill the entire population of Louisiana where it would take years upon years to rebuild because of their sinning nature?3. It is said many times that the United States is a Christian nation, therefore would you agree that the government should not help the people recover from this brutal hurricane because it was Jesus' will that they should die and suffer for their sins?4. Scripturally, we're told that our Jesus is ever loving and forgiving, therefore is our Jesus a hypocrite when He brutally killed His Jewish creation, including innocent children, and destroyed Louisiana as shown in the horrific photos and videos that are now seen upon the News channels?5. Again, since the USA is a Christian Nation, and where Jesus controls this nation within the scriptures, don't you think that the hurricanes should be named with biblical terminology instead of random alphabetical human names? An example could be: "The Second Flood of Jesus" and number them sequentially as time goes by.Jesus, the membership, and myself await a cogent response to the above questions that you said you would answer as shown in your quote above.
I have responded to these questions at https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6720/post-links/289848
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
YOUR ... QUOTE IN ASKNG ME IF I, AM CHRISTIAN?!!!: “Thirdly, were you ever a Christian? Or what has made you despise Christians so much? Seriously.ROFLOL!!! In turn, SERIOUSLY, when will you ever learn and accept the FACT that I am the only TRUE Christian upon this Religion Forum because unlike you, I have had to accept ALL, and I repeat, ALL of the JUDEO-Christian Bible in its entirety, and in showing the fact that Jesus was a real SOB as explicitly shown within the scriptures! Whereas you can't accept these facts about Jesus, other than to turn yourself into a pretzel with your Devil Speak in trying to run away from Jesus’ true modus operandi!
So are you going to answer the question or not? We all know you are an atheist now. But the question remains, were you ever a Christian? And if so, which denomination? And for how long? Why did you leave? What was the cause of such a turnaround?
YOUR ... QUOTE: “What was it that made you turn against God - with such vengeance - that gave you eyes to only see the evil in him?I have in no way “turned against Jesus” you bible ignorant fool, whereas “I have accepted Jesus in His disgusting and despicable ways,” understand the godly difference Bible fool? Any TRUE Christian like myself can only see the evil in Jesus as the serial killer Yahweh God incarnate, and anything less turns the Christian into a pseudo-christian like you!
Just answer the question, unless of course you are afraid of being a little vulnerable to the forum. I am happy to accept a pm from you if you would prefer.
In accepting Jesus as described above, and since I am always forgiven by Him (Acts 10:43), my reward in accepting Jesus as a real despicable Son of a Bitch is the fact that there will be no women in heaven but only men, praise! Whereas the superior man while upon earth had to put up with these Sisters of Eve in their continuous irritating emotive actions while being on their “menstrual cycle” for the entire month, of which was enough!
Well forgiveness requires repentance. Luke 17: 3-4. And that surely has not occurred given your comments.
Jesus’ inspired words state in how disgusting women truly are, and who am I to call Him a LIAR in this respect?“I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare.” (Ecclesiastes 7:26)“Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.” (Colossians 3:18)“But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp the authority over the man, but to be in silence.” (Timothy 2:12)“Simon Peter said to them, “Mary should leave us, for females are not worthy of life.” Jesus said, “See, I am going to attract her to make her male so that she too might become a living spirit that resembles you males. For every female (element) that makes itself male will enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Thomas: 114)
I actually wonder - given your furious and intensive comments on gender, whether that is the point of engagement.
Let's just say that we are still waiting for your responses to these questions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
TRADESECRET, whose gender went from a woman to a man, and then to unknown, and then back to a man, and then went to unknown again, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she/unknown follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, AN ADMITTED SEXUAL DEVIANT, and obviously had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery, Satanic Bible Rewriter, an embarrassed LIAR of their true gender, and goes against Jesus in not helping the poor, has turned into a HYPOCRITE, and a LIAR, teaches Christianity at Universities in a “blind leading the blind” scenario, and is a False Prophet, says that Jesus is rational when He commits abortions and makes His creation eat their children, and that Jesus is rational when He allows innocent babies to be smashed upon the rocks, has now changed genders 5 TIMES in their profile page,TRADESECRET QUOTE TO THE BROTHER D: “I am not scared to respond to a religious question. Please ask. And start your own thread.”https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6688-biblical-contradiction?page=2&post_number=45As your promise “as written” above so states, therefore I ask these questions to you regarding my thread as listed herewith: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6720-jesus-is-still-pissed-at-the-sinful-state-of-louisiana?page=1&post_number=11. Do you think that Jesus’ hurricane “Ida” is appropriate enough for the continued sinning of the state of Louisiana and within the city of New Orleans, as shown within my initial post shown in the above link?2. Do you think that Jesus should have brought forth a level 6 hurricane, which is unheard of at this time, but in Jesus being our serial killing Yahweh God incarnate, He could bring forth such a forceful hurricane to really devastate and kill the entire population of Louisiana where it would take years upon years to rebuild because of their sinning nature?3. It is said many times that the United States is a Christian nation, therefore would you agree that the government should not help the people recover from this brutal hurricane because it was Jesus' will that they should die and suffer for their sins?4. Scripturally, we're told that our Jesus is ever loving and forgiving, therefore is our Jesus a hypocrite when He brutally killed His Jewish creation, including innocent children, and destroyed Louisiana as shown in the horrific photos and videos that are now seen upon the News channels?5. Again, since the USA is a Christian Nation, and where Jesus controls this nation within the scriptures, don't you think that the hurricanes should be named with biblical terminology instead of random alphabetical human names? An example could be: "The Second Flood of Jesus" and number them sequentially as time goes by.
Answered in the thread https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6720/post-links/289848
Created:
-->
@Stephen
You do if you claim there to be "clear evidence" you dunce. Your double standards are dually noted, you clown.Where in the bible is your "clear biblical evidence" that John the Baptist anointed Jesus a king. You don't have any do you? So who there was making the great assumption and or assertions, you clown.
This thread is not about John the Baptist. I might be wrong, but I think you actually asked for that one to be shut down. Probably because the heat got to hot for you.
Stick to the topic of the thread or leave.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
1. Do you think that Jesus’ hurricane “Ida” is appropriate enough for the continued sinning of the state of Louisiana and within the city of New Orleans, as shown within my initial post of this thread?
I note your opinion. It seems to me that every region in the world is sinning by that logic. Why? Because every region in the world is experiencing Covid-19. Why stop at just Louisiana? Yet I wonder too if your logic is correct, why is it that the sun keeps coming up in that State? And as you remind us, God controls the weather, good and bad, God is sending good weather as well to that part of the country. Hmmm. So is He judging the sinners with bad weather and blessing the good people with good weather?
2. Do you think that Jesus should have brought forth a level 6 hurricane, which is unheard of at this time, but in Jesus being our serial killing Yahweh God incarnate, He could bring forth such a forceful hurricane to really devastate and kill the entire population of Louisiana where it would take years upon years to rebuild because of their sinning nature?
I, thankfully, don't have to think about what God will do. He is much wiser than me. He knows what He is doing. And I don't need to question His methods or His determinations. God can do anything He likes. That is His prerogative.
3. It is said many times that the United States is a Christian nation, therefore would you agree that the government should not help the people recover from this brutal hurricane because it was Jesus' will that they should die and suffer for their sins?
I know it is said that America is a Christian Nation. My view is that the question of nations being Christian or not is a vexed one. How do we determine such a status? By its Constitution? By whether the majority of people are Christian? By the religion of the president? By the laws of the nation? By how we treat the vulnerable? How is it to be determined? I think governments should help people who are suffering. Certainly they should be coordinating it.
4. Scripturally, we're told that our Jesus is ever loving and forgiving, therefore is our Jesus a hypocrite when He brutally killed His Jewish creation, including innocent children, and destroyed Louisiana as shown in the horrific photos and videos that are now seen upon the News channels?
The Bible indicates that Jesus forgives when people repent. If there is no repentance there is no forgiveness. God's love can also be tough love. I think the question of brutality is one of nuance. The question of innocence is also relevant. What makes someone innocent in the eyes of humanity and what makes a person innocent in the eyes of God? God does what He says He will do - when people sin. If He did not then He would be a hypocrite and a liar.
5. Again, since the USA is a Christian Nation, and where Jesus controls this nation within the scriptures, don't you think that the hurricanes should be named with biblical terminology instead of random alphabetical human names? An example could be: "The Second Flood of Jesus" and number them sequentially as time goes by.
I don't accept that America is a Christian Nation. I think its God is self. Hence it serves Self. And that is evident in its laws and people. America may well have some Christians living there, this does not make it a Christian nation. I am not sure that hurricanes need to be named per se with human names - but they probably ought to be identified somehow. Why name Wednesday Wednesday? Except to differentiate it from other days and to recognise it as day 4 in the week. Wednesday is named after Woden. Is that because Wednesday is a day of war? And thursday after Thor. Thursdays of course are all days of thunder and rain.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
No you fkn can't can you, you pompous penis"I have not used one single "vulgarity" https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/360/post-links/15311
Well can you show where he did?
I don't need to. This is your assertion. Not mine. You are arguing from silence. LOL! But you can't see that can you Mr Uneducated?
You want it all fkn ways. and I won't let you .
There is no reason to let your emotions get involved Stevie Blunder. Yet there is no all ways here. There is only one way. You made the assertion. You back it up if you want a discussion. No one has to do any more than refute your assertion with another assertion. Surely, you know this Mr Uneducated?
You won't let me???? Won't let me what? Keep you in your uneducated place. You do this all by yourself. You don't need any help.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
But you haven't answered anything you clown, unless I am to take your silence as some kind of an answer.Interesting that you claim on the one hand that I cannot produce biblical evidence for god not informing Mary of her son's tortuous demise and on the other claim the god did inform Mary of her sons demise yet produce no evidence for your claim.Yet the bibles silence on the matter is proof to me that no such conversation had taken place.
Stevie, I have answered on several occasions now. I don't have to respond to your assertions with anything but another assertion. That is all that is required and all that is appropriate. I don't have to produce anything to substantiate anything. The narratives speak for themselves. Your question however is not compatible with the narratives and as such is an invention of your mind. The bible's silence in respect to your opinion is what matters.
As have you.Now again, where is the biblical "clear evidence that John the baptist anointed Jesus king".
Ha ha! You keep trying don't you. What part of - don't change the subject are you having trouble with Stephen? This thread is about God and Mary - and we are waiting for your evidence. Although I won't hold my breath.
No one really cares what you "believe".And that is their prerogative.
yep.
You don't know anything about me.You mean I don't know you personally except for all of the bragging about all of your theological credentials that you offered all over the WWW and on this forum in particular as if this affords you some-kind of status over all other members here.
I have not bragged once. You have done enough for both of us. Mentioning my background is an appropriate thing to do. It is not bragging per se. Although I know it hurts your feelings since you are uneducated and have no qualifications. Anyone mentioning anything is equivalent to bragging in your eyes. I don't think it gives me any status - although it does mean that I probably do have some runs on the board.
I have told you before, what you believe about me is irrelevant to me and my own threads.
And yet you take it as a personal insult when people call you stupid. LOL!
We are still waiting for you to substantiate anything.
Such as?
Such as where God failed to tell Mary that Jesus was going to die a cruel and violent death?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Then simply show us where in the WHOLE of the bible it is that Jesus wept over the death of John the baptist. You assert and claim many things and present them as biblical fact without a single shred of biblical evidence often.
Keep asking and you will get the same answer. It is your thread and your assertions. It is up to you to prove your case. You have argued from silence and therefore I am entitled to argue from silence as well. You are incorrect about God and Mary. Let alone your comments about Jesus. LOL!
Didn't you once claim that there was "clear biblical evidence" that Jesus was anointed king by John the Baptist? I actually agreed with you but I said outright that couldn't prove it. And you couldn't produce the "very clear biblical evidence" when I asked you to , either! And it wouldn't have been the first time that you claim that there is "very clear evidence" in the bible for one thing or another when there simply isn't.
Whatever I have said on another thread is irrelevant to this one. But you changing the topic is only diverting from the fact that you have once again argued from silence. Making an assertion. Without a shred of evidence.
The facts are that WE DON’T KNOW!!! this is why I have said all along that these gospels are vague and anomalous, enigmatic, dubious and packed with half told stories.
No. The Fact is you don't know. That is quite different. But repeating your mantra does not change the facts.
And this is why people like you believe that you can take literary license to add, extract, interpret and misinterpret, expunge and sometimes deliberately lie at will when it comes to scripture.
You don't know anything about me. I don't use anything but the tools I have been equipped with - the scientific method in language skills. If you think that is arbitrary then that is your problem. I expect you do think the scientific method is unacceptable. You, after all, are uneducated and have no qualifications to speak anything but your own opinion. Which by and large is not comparable with any scholars of any note.
How many times does it take before anything ever sinks in to that thick dense skull of yours ?
I don't lie. It is you who is the fraud. Not me. You don't know whether you are an atheist or a theist. If I am thick, Stevie Blunder, what does that make you? LOL! I would prefer to be me any day of the week that an uneducated and stupid and unqualified person such as you.
I have admitted many times that I cannot prove my own thoughts , ideas or theories concerning these unreliable scriptures.
You certainly have demonstrated that many times. In fact - I cannot actually think of any occasion in which you have provided evidence for anything.
I believe Jesus and or members of his followers had a hand in the murder of John the baptist, but I cannot prove it. I believe Jesus and John were rivals from day one, but I cannot prove it no more than you can prove god or Jesus actually exists or existed.
No one really cares what you "believe". Proving such a lie is never going to happen. Not just because you cannot prove it - but because it is pure speculation and nonsense. You do understand the word "fanciful" don't you? Proving God has never been the problem, it is persuasion which is the issue.
What I have proved over many months is that you are the most bible ignorant cretin of a Pastor and Chaplain to have ever have crossed my path.
Uh no. Not even once. But you have repeated the truth that I am a pastor, a lawyer, a chaplain - someone who is educated, qualified, and gets paid for being so. Unlike you, who is uneducated, unqualified and whose opinion is well, for want of a better word, irrelevant for anyone who might care. I take it as a grain of salt what you say about me. It really worries me not.
But once again you cannot even keep to your own thread. We are still waiting for you to substantiate anything. Please begin.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Take the word "homophobic" or the name "bigot" or the term "racist". These three words are thrown at the Conservative now whenever the Conservative simply explains what they are agreeing with or disagreeing with.I agree that the left throws these words around far too frequently and often makes no real attempt to understand the point of view of the person they hurl them at. But you cannot seriously claim that a term which is used to call someone out on their hatred, is hatred.
I can because they are being used as words of hate. Not just calling people out. But using them to incite people to hatred. I am not saying this is intentional - but that is the impact of those words. Think of all of the viral videos uploaded of people using that word. Canceling them from life, whether it is justified or not. the Left want to get rid of hate speech - yet they refuse to acknowledge they do it themselves. This is one reason Conservatives think progressives are hypocrites. This is why Conservatives believe that the Left have one rule for themselves and another one for those they disagree with.
I think a perfect example of what I’m pointing to is Candice Owens getting turned away by a Covid testing facility, and then turning around claiming she was denied service because of her politics. That sentiment was then echoed on Fox News, and the narrative continues to on.
I don't know anything about that. I am not an American. I have not even heard about it until you mentioned it here.
This narrative is however, absolutely absurd. She was denied service because she is spreading misinformation about COVID vaccines and encouraging people to not only not take them but to not wear masks. Again, this isn’t about tax policy, this is about public safety in the middle of a pandemic. There is nothing political about this, or at least there shouldn’t be. But that’s exactly what the right does… politicize an apolitical issue and then claim anyone who acts against it is acting against their politics. How ridiculous.
One person doing the wrong thing does not ipso facto translate to a generalisation to every conservative. I see Lefties - becoming very violent with their speech and with their fists. They call people a racist but then never want to discuss it further. It is "take our word for it" or go away. This is not engaging in ideas. It is shutting down any potential for a conversation.
It’s a medical clinic fighting back against Covid and refusing to serve someone who is largely responsible for the mindset that’s spreading the disease. If you can’t see how this is not about her politics you are either blind or you need a mental health examination.
Again, I am not an American, I don't really follow American politics that much. I have heard of Candice Owens. But I don't know much about her politics. Medical clinics like every other organisation in America have the right to be left alone. Yet, both sides of politics seem to have the places they picket and cause grief with. How many times has the Business Centre been picketed and attacked by the Left? How many times has Trump's centre been attacked? Lots of times. If the Left were serious about getting rid of hate speech - they would not discriminate. They would stop doing it themselves. But they don't. In fact they don't even admit it when they do it.
So anyway that’s my example of the day. You clearly believe the right is being censored for their political beliefs. Can you provide something, anything to support it?
As I said I am not an American. I am Australian. Laws are quite different over here. We don't have free speech. We have laws against Hate speech. However hate speech in our laws is defined by the Left and only relates to things that anti-progressive. In Victoria, we are not even currently permitted to speak against the government's laws about how it is handling the pandemic without fear of being charged for incitement. Several people have been charged. More will be charged.
I gave examples above about censure. In Victoria, I am no longer permitted to pray for any person who has questions about their sexuality. Even if they come and ask me - even if they are an adult. If I do I can be charged and be given a maximum of 10 years in prison. In Victoria it is currently in the process of banning people having flags depicting the NAZI swastika. But not the Hammer and Sickle.
Don't misunderstand me. I am ANTI- NAZI. I am pro- freedom and pro - democracy. I am also anti communist.
Yet, I think the censure of these items will cause more harm in the community - because when the Government - the Left censures anyone - it tends to not stop it, but to force it underground where it grows and grows.
Banning things - prohibiting things is not the answer or solution. Yes, it sends a message. But not one that will do good. One that says - We are stronger than you - and we will beat you to pulp if you disagree. Again - this is left wing politics to the hilt. the ends justifies the means. As long as we get to where we want to go - then how we get there does not matter.
If the Left would throw away this utilitarian justification, then perhaps many who think that the journey is just as important as the destination would not be so afraid of them.
Yet, while the Left and indeed any Socialist including the Far Right - hold to this measure of justification and morality - then they will always have people who will never trust them. I don't. By the way - I don't even consider myself right wing. Others might object. And that is fine.
I am a libertarian who believes in small government. Hence neither Left nor Right politically or economically.
In religious thinking I would fall into the Confessional type. Hence anti-fundamentalist and anti- evangelical but also anti-Liberal and anti- socialist camps.
I think on a political level, there should be no borders and no need for passports. Everyone should be able to travel whereever they like, in the world. Not necessarily onto private property. I would like to see the end of nuclear weapons and chemical weapons. And biological weapons. I was not a fan of Trump. I dislike Biden even more. I could not stand Obama or the Bushes. I'm not old enough to know Reagan or Carter. Yet I am pleased to see the end of the Berlin Wall and the end of the soviet union. I don't agree with state funded public education. I do agree with separation of church and state. I think we should care for the environment. I think vaccines are a good thing. I don't think the modern society is ready or mature enough for the death penalty.
I do think the Left are dangerous. And I think the far right are dangerous as well. Who is worse? I think both the Nazis and the Communists are equally dangerous.
Any government which says - the ends justifies the means is dangerous. Any government which uses the "greater good" argument is dangerous. Any government which just tells it people to comply in all things is dangerous.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Brother two things. Maybe three things.
Firstly, I have no fear of getting banned just because Stephen is delusional about passwords. So don't stress. I am not going anywhere.
Secondly, you were correct. I did manage to leave the "not" out of that sentence. I noticed it yesterday, but time had run out for edit. And in the end I couldn't be bothered worrying about it. I figured rational people would realise it was a typo. Others would use it to their own ends. Hey, You noticed and still used it to make your points. Kudos to you.
Thirdly, were you ever a Christian? Or what has made you despise Christians so much? Seriously. I am asking a genuine question. I just cannot fathom why someone would masquerade as something they despised unless there was a specific reason. I can't see how any rational person would take on such a persona just for the kicks. The only rational conclusion is that - God hurt you pretty bad and although I suppose it none of my business per se, as a general discussion point it might be helpful if we can start to address some of your pain. There is no point in letting it eat you up.
Obviously you are not wanting answers to the many questions you raise. You never engage properly with those things. In fact it seems to spur you on to be even more obnoxious. Yet, there must be something you are after. Some sort of closure. Was it you or someone you loved hurt or killed? What was it that made you turn against God - with such vengeance - that gave you eyes to only see the evil in him? 🤔
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
"I have explained myself. You can take it or leave it."
Ditto.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
It seems so. But then again, that is the point of this thread. A place for Brother to throw his personal attacks. And for others like me to throw them back. Not a very pleasant thread. But there you go. It is just what the Brother ordered.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
All hypothetical.I think all three of us are in agreement then.Good.
Which three is that? You, Stephen, and Brother? Did you forget dimtim?
I think that if you are simply going to interpret whatever you like in a subjective manner, then you are not after the truth. That is a matter for you - but it also means that your comments won't very often be relevant or on point. That is your prerogative. We all have the right to be dumb. I won't take that away from you. If you do however want to engage in the topic, I will be happy to discuss it with you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
What the modern NT states is not the same as what a real JTB might have thought.
Says who? How do you know that the NT authors are not presenting the thoughts of JTB at the time? You don't know. JTB never wrote a book, did he? These authors never spoke against him. They seem to hold him in very high esteem. What would be their motive to lie?
He might have thought, whose this fucking interloper stealing my thunder.
I can see no reason why he would think that. And you have offered nothing but SPECULATION based on what? On the notion that the NT could not possibly reflect what JTB thought. And you know this how? Because you had a time machine? Because you interviewed the authors.
The fact is - and I use the word fact advisedly, is that the NT narratives paint a very good picture of John the Baptist. And if this is not accurate to what happened in real life, we can never really know. Yet what we do know is HOW he is depicted in the NT narratives. And since it is the NT narratives we are discussing, speculation outside of the narratives is well - for want of a better word - irrelevant . If however you have a source of information from the thoughts of John the Baptist, please disclose it for all of us to read.
To assume a Messiah and a Baptist is one thing....But to claim that you can read their minds is pushing things a bit too far Trade.
I am not saying I can read minds Zed. I am saying - let us look at the evidence presented in the NT narratives that we have. And that is all we are saying. Looking at the evidence. And the evidence does not ANYWHERE present any idea that John thought he was the messiah and that he was jealous of Jesus. Nowhere.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
One of the things I take issue with in our current political discourse is the propensity of self identified conservatives to claim that the left just wants to silence their voices. This is or at least was mostly in reference to social media but seems to have grown quite a bit over the past few months and has become a widely accepted narrative in conservatives circles.This narrative is of course false. The left is not trying to silence conservatives. No one is getting banned from Twitter over disputes about tax policy. This is about cracking down on hate speech and in particular, speech that can lead to or incite violence, or misinformation that is literally killing people. It just so happens to be the case that the vast majority of hate speech in our political discourse these days is coming from the right, to the point where the FBI has even taken notice.These two very different things should be easy to distinguish, so why is it so difficult for so many?I think the reason why is because right wing politics centers itself around culture issues and tribalism, leading to a sense of community in right wing circles that doesn’t exist on the left. But a sense of community in politics distorts the entire point. Politics is supposed to be about solving problems, not which side are you rooting for.What this ultimately culminates in is a conflation of political beliefs with a sense of self identity, and that is where the issue here comes to light. When you tangle your sense of self identity to your beliefs, anything that opposes your beliefs is perceived as an attack on you personally, causing a very distorted view of every disagreement you observe. When another “fellow conservative” is banned from a platform all you see is that they banned a conservative, not what that conservative was actually banned for. And when it happens over and over again, now it’s undeniable that they’re just banning conservatives. The justification is not worthy of consideration because there’s no sense in looking closer at something that is obvious from afar, but it’s only obvious because of the tribalism present from the start.Obviously conservatives will disagree. So what am I getting wrong?
Hmm just about everything. The Left is trying to shut down free speech for conservatives. They want to be able to say whatever they like and then shut the other side down.
Take the word "homophobic" or the name "bigot" or the term "racist". These three words are thrown at the Conservative now whenever the Conservative simply explains what they are agreeing with or disagreeing with. The Lefties - have taken these words and throw them at Conservatives despite the fact that Conservatives themselves feel quite threatened by these terms. I know Conservatives who are labeled these terms without proper reason - and yet once labeled - then they start receiving death threats, threats to stop them doing business, threats to commit violence - and just to be clear - it does not stop with threats - it often becomes real. Yet the Left say - this is not hate speech. It is just calling it what it is. This is bollocks.
Are the Left's trying to stop free speech? Yes. But not all speech. Just the speech of the Conservatives. Lefties don't want to have rational discussions. People get cancelled from Twitter or FB for not following the Left wing narrative. I reject that most of the hate speech is coming from the Right. This is to ignore all of the hate speech coming from the Left. You just omit all of the hate speech from the left. You rationalise what the Left is doing. And justify it as ok. Yet that is just Left wing narrative.
Left wing politics has several main planks. One of those is "the ends justify the means". This means that the Left believes that it can do whatever it needs to do to get the result it wants. The Conservatives - tend to believe that the journey is as important as the destination. That process is equal to outcome. That the ends do not justify the means. When one side of politics holds to the view that the ends justifies the means - it gives them total justification to cheat and to lie and to steal and then to justify such actions if it brings about the end it is after.
This is the essence of the greater good argument. It is the inbuilt problem of the last election. The Left promote a particular narrative and then get upset when others believe them. From my perspective the Left always had a reason to lie and cheat about the last election because for them the end justifies the means of getting Trump out. If they had not been so gung ho throughout the entire Trump presidency, then perhaps things might have been different. But they promoted their agenda of hate and they justified it in their philosophy. It was only logical that it would come back and bite them.
I have no sympathy for the Democrats and the progressive Americans. They get what they deserve. And now America unfortunately gets what it deserves - the worst president in history -
Tribalism is a convenient myth isn't? Rather than addressing the problem at hand - a diversion away from where the proper narrative.
Created:
-->
@Reece101
I don't reckon that has much substance to it.
Which scientists? Which field?
Which country?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
And answer me this Reverend "Tradey", what kind of mother would go joyously bounding off in jubilation to tell her cousin that she was going to have a baby that was going to be hunted down, betrayed and arrested and put on trial and then beaten senseless and then nailed to a cross to die an agonising death?The sort of Mother who trusts in God.Show me where in the bible that Mary once says she trusted in god?
I don't need to. You have ASSERTED based on an argument from silence. It would be silly to try and actually produce any evidence - since it is your assertion - the burden of proof is on your head. I can simply assert in any responses against your assertions. Until you start producing evidence - you are merely commenting on something which is not relevant to the narrative. Of course you can try and make it about the narrative- but that would require positive evidence wouldn't? And we both know - you ain't got none.
Resurrection wept when Lazarus died,Yet didn't shed a tear when John the baptist his cousin and the" greatest prophet that ever lived" was supposed to have been murdered by Herod.
Oh really. And where is your evidence for such a nonsensical assertion. Really Stevie Blunder, yet another blanket statement without a shred of evidence. Not difficult to see why you flunked at school - you uneducated and unqualified flunkie.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
"no two users in this thread share any system information."You sending him your password via email to get you out the shite wouldn't show in the system, you clown.Now stay with the thread.
So let's see how Stephen comes to his conclusion.
Step 1. lose a stupid argument
Step 2. think of anything - any kind of wild theory to try and rationalise the truth that you have crap in your mouth.
Step3. Throw away all logic and reason.
Step 4.. Repeat your idiotic view a hundred times.
Step 5 . when all else fails, just assert it again.
Step 6. Takes a prozac and hope no one actually reads what he says.
Step 7. repeat as necessary. Since everyone knows that repeating something makes it true. You are the typical woke left wing progressive. Aren't you?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Yes, Ragnar rejected your delusion.
"no two users in this thread share any system information."
but I suppose you are entitled to your own subjective delusions - no matter how many times you are proved wrong.
It also seems to support your position that you and the Brother do not share a password. That surprised me.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
All hypothetical peeps.Only the story tellers knew what they were on about.I think that the thirteenth disciple Maggie Delaney, referred to hairy Mary the tart with a heart....Though her lover Ged preferred to keep it quiet....And her boyfriend dumb Joe never said a great deal.And little Josh got into all sorts of trouble with the authorities....Something to do with deceptionWell....That's how I interpret things.
Well good for you. I interpret your words to mean that you agree with me and disagree with Stephen. When interpretations are as subjective as you think - then what else are we going to think?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
And answer me this Reverend "Tradey", what kind of mother would go joyously bounding off in jubilation to tell her cousin that she was going to have a baby that was going to be hunted down, betrayed and arrested and put on trial and then beaten senseless and then nailed to a cross to die an agonising death?
The sort of Mother who trusts in God, his messiah, and who understands the resurrection.
A little bit like Abraham and his son Isaac as he marched up the hill as his mother watched on trusting and believing in God.
And guess what? In both situations - resurrection was achieved. the first metaphorically, the second literally.
Don't forget that even the Jesus, the giver of life and the Resurrection wept when Lazarus died, even though he knew he was going to raise him from the dead.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
NOPE! I admitted they are ONLY my thoughts, ideas and theories concerning these unreliable scriptures. And have also admitted that I have no supporting evidence for my own thoughts ideas and theories.But I do find a lot of evidence from the bible itself that puts anything that you, a bible dunce in your own right, to shame often.
If you had found ANY Evidence you would have produced it. You produce verses - which you think contradict each other and or Christian thought and then you make a comment or ask a question - with an obviously slant to it. That is not evidence. That is commentary. From an uneducated and unqualified person. That's you, isn't? Uneducated and unqualified. I know how much you love it when people speak so highly of you. You crave attention and get quite upset when it does not come to you.
You are like every other person who thinks they know the bible better than anyone else. That is why you are so amusing. You would fit well into most fundamentalist churches, who say and don't think. LOL! You just do it from the outside while you think you are looking in.
They invariably are people - who don't need to be taught anymore (so they think). They know it all. They know better than those who actually do study the languages and texts. (all sarcasm by the way) But when a layperson - that's you Stevie Blunder - asks a question that the teacher does not know - it simplistically confirms in the mind of the layperson that they do know better. It's a little bit like the question of vaccines today. All of these laypeople know better than the professionals.
But this is the point. You NEVER produce evidence. And the next time you do, will be the first. Teachers know they don't know everything. That is the beauty of being a teacher - yes, that is me. ( I know how much you love repeating that) We are constantly learning. And yes, we can even and frequently do - learn from laypeople. We understand that being a teacher and educated DOES NOT imply being the fount of all wisdom. But we do have a certain influence. And this really gets up the nose of laypersons - especially uneducated and unqualified ones like you.
But hey, I suppose that is one of the differences between an educated person and an uneducated one. The uneducated person - is a know it all and does not even know it. Ring any bells Stevie Blunder.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
TRADESECRET, YOU NEVER ANSWERED ME, DO YOU WANT ME TO SHOW THE MEMBERSHIP THE 107 POSTS, AND COUNTING, THAT I GAVE YOU INSPIRED BY JESUS, AND WHERE YOU RAN AWAY FROM THEM IN "SILENCE" AND EMBARRASSMENT? YES?
Yes. I did answer you. I said I would choose to NOT respond to any questions you ask me that are not religious and personal. My answer then as it is now is - Answered.
After all, if you don't get it yet, you are even a larger buffoon that you portray yourself as.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
TRADESECRET, whose gender went from a woman to a man, and then to unknown, and then back to a man, and then went to unknown again, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she/unknown follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, AN ADMITTED SEXUAL DEVIANT, and obviously had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery, Satanic Bible Rewriter, an embarrassed LIAR of their true gender, and goes against Jesus in not helping the poor, has turned into a HYPOCRITE, and a LIAR, teaches Christianity at Universities in a “blind leading the blind” scenario, and is a False Prophet, says that Jesus is rational when He commits abortions and makes His creation eat their children, and that Jesus is rational when He allows innocent babies to be smashed upon the rocks, has now changed genders 5 TIMES in their profile page,YOUR QUOTE THAT YOU ARE NOW LYING AND TRYING TO GET OUT OF IN BEING THE CONTINUED LYING FOOL: "I was talking about Ragnar as a lead mod..... I concede I did not use lead. I even said he resigned as mod - but surely anyone with any sense of intelligence would know it was from being the boss, not from everything.YOUR QUOTE WHERE YOU SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT RAGNAR IS NOT A MODERATOR ANYMORE AND LEFT THIS FORUM, PERIOD!:"I'm not sure if you realise but Ragnar is no longer a mod. He resigned a while ago." https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6683/post-links/288363Barring your sophomoric misspelling of "realise," which should be REALIZE, whereas the key phrase in your now LYING quote above is: " ... Ragnar is no longer a mod. .... He resigned a while ago., is taken upon its face as written, understand? HELLO? GET IT?As if your complete Bible stupidity isn't enough within this forum, now you "try" and get out of your ignorance upon the moderator situation within this forum by LYING and rewriting what you said previously as explicitly shown, whereas you think that the membership is as stupid as you where we would not notice this infraction of yours, NOT!Tradesecret, let me save you some time, in the link below is an online "Reading Comprehension Class for Kids" that you are to use to save yourself more embarrassment in your blatant "trying to get out of an embarrassing predicament again" within this forum as shown with the FACTS above.
I have explained myself. You can take it or leave it. But I have explained my words - which were addressed not to you - but to Ethang. I have no need to do so anymore.
Created: