Total posts: 382
-->
@Best.Korea
He is not representing chrisians just a poitical party.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Ah. So the africans and asians invaded too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Well that's the confusing thing about the map. The map says white not "non native."
Map also shows what is taken away from "whites."
Must be a typo maybe.
Created:
Id say there was something fishy going on. How else do you get a hand full of gents to dress like random simpson characters?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Is that map supposed to show land taken by whites? ..
Also who or what are considered white?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Conservatives on abortion: The SCIENTISTS have all the answers! TRUST The SCIENTISTS!!!Conservatives on COVID vaccination, transgenderism, climate change: Scientists are CURROPT!
Please remember that the abortion debate is older than covid, climate change, and transgenderism. Skeptiscism in these newer debates/discoveries/etc. should be understood.
Where as abortion and the evidence often used in debates can date back to 1980's if not further (Im referencing the science in it).
From what I've noticed, when the science leans left, the conservatives claim it's because the scientists are part of the deep state. The one time when science brings about a right wing belief (zygotes are human), then the conservatives act like the pro science party.
Although this is not every conservative, why are we overlooking how the one time science does not cater to a pro-abortion/"left wing" political agenda - the science is ignored?
See these questions can be flipped. But really amount to little benefit in dialogue or understanding.
If you want the left to agree with you on the abortion issue because of the scientist's findings, just be prepared to agree with them on all the other left wing stances...
Although this is not addresse to me. I will say that people dont have to agree with everything or everystance. That is a little absurd.
What matters is ability to have dialogue and come to a point of understanding.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
So is this a debate between the two topics to argue which is correct or are we discussing similarities and differences between the two entities?
Or perchance is this a pro vs con list?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
They made crime organizations conparible to unions and civic organizations too, right? Or was that venezuela .....hm...
Created:
Although there is an average, a doctor would help identify a more exact number. Pretty sure the measurements is not in liters.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
Consider selling the site to another forum based website. Maybe something similar in format or theme. Except lacking in the debates section.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgim
Well copy and paste is a bit hard so here is link to litteral translation ::
When we read the literal translation we can see different words being used. The text does not say miscarry. Any reference to having children is future tense - refering to ones ability to have children.
First there is a ritual to determine guilt. No reference to a woman being pregnent for the ritual is present.
The given passage does not represent induced abortions.
Here is scholar's approach/ explaination:
Now there are two common areas where, in my experience, people who are pro-abortion have misused this passage. The first concerns the nature of what the woman drinks. It’s portrayed as if it’s an abortifacient, something that will kill the child. This is clearly not the case. Water with a little bit of dust and ink in it is not an abortifacient. And it’s clearly not meant to be an abortifacient, because if she’s innocent—let’s say she’s pregnant by her husband—well, it’s not going to kill the child. It wouldn’t kill any child, because a little water with a little bit of ink and dust in it is not an abortifacient, period.
The second has to do with a non-literal translation of what it says the bodily effects are going to be. Literally, what it says is that if she’s guilty, that her thigh will waste away and her abdomen swell. And sometimes people translate this as if she will miscarry, but that’s not what it says literally. And so that’s, I think, the second source of making a mistake in this passage. It doesn’t actually describe a miscarriage. Certainly it does not do so clearly. What it does say is: if she’s innocent, then her abdomen will not swell and her thigh won’t waste away, and she will be able to conceive children.
Created:
-->
@Path2Paradise
What is your resolution for proof?
Created:
-->
@IlDiavolo
I have not much time but here goes.
1. Interesting
A) no rebuttle or practical thought about contradictions given?
B) here is a description:
Shorter video on same topic:
C) hm.
I don't see a direct relation to question presented.
So how we know that is the right translation? there are translations that span thousands of years.
The quote you give is given in videos in b. They don't give the same conclusion.
Translation doesn't seem to be an issue to be honest. Above link gives same words right?
But lets ask the question. Why are we seeing a machine if the person giving their account says "living creature?"
Ironic you give a quote that deacribes an angel.
Created:
-->
@IlDiavolo
I have not much time but here goes.
1. If bible was in any way encrypted or aimed to develop stories about aliens, then we would see at least two things.
A) there would be a historical documentation that coincides with your statements. Where people who developed the bible and those who soon used it can be documented believing the same thing.
When we look at our recorded history, those who developed the bible believed in christian dogma/theology. Those who used the bible in any form believed in and used christian dogma/theology.
We have historical evidence to see christianity grow. This includes documents from Roman Empire's late era, through dark ages, through multiple eras after that, to modern times. We see the changes through history.
All this excludes aliens.
B) the angels described in bible include those who do not look or act like men. How would you navigate that?
C) im still lookin at the "glory of god" video but so far I see a translation for an individual phrase. This phrase is absent from the context of the other words in the sentences, paragraphs, and other statements in the bible. Looking at individual phrases looses context in how a word is used.
If we look at one sentence you say, "what the ancient Hebrews really tried to tell us."
If anyone is trying to tell us something they would say it. Right? Why would alien visitation be a secret if they:
Knew about it
Shared it
Wanted to continue to share it
Put a secret into two phrases for people to decipher.
???
2. . Domesticating characteristics?
For those who do not know
Id say possible that those who are more aggressive eventually fall to others or their own doing. Thinking they can take on a bear or saber tooth.
Uh... That's all for now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
More over, if the Son is the Father what of Mary getting pregnant? Is this not an incestuous congregation? The Father has sex with the mother to conceive the Son who is also the Father.....so technically the Son, who is also the father, had sex with his mother"...
That was the point. Your point. Now abandoned. I rebuttled to no contest.
.... you have made ascensions that simply cannot be supported .
Assertions?
Chico the bible has nothing to do with what you say.
My assertion is on your comments -along with others, in earlier posts - provide inherent meanings to given statements. I already explained it. You can read over it. There is no passage that details what you say except your own posts.
So if you really want to argue against something unrelated to your [original] point, quote yourself. I won't waste my time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
So as per usual, you are just another believer asserting your opinions and presenting them as biblical fact and that is not prepared to support your claims.
I did not say anything was a biblical fact except that God did not have sex.
You are implying what is biblical. I just took information from posts involving your dialogue and another's. These posts said Jesus was God, the same god as the father, jesus was human, etc.
Based on that Jesus is biologically human and devine. No other human is identified as devine. Two pats that do not exist together (coexist) normally.
But hey.
Yo.
If you dont believe what you typed, that's fine. Just say so.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I dont have to. The comments made in this thread have been about God having sex and then Jesus is born.
I disputed that God had sex. Seems to not be rebuttled anymore.
However, if we look over the comments made, Jesus is accepted in the conversation to being born and a god. Even the same god as god the father.
If Jesus is god and pertains a biological human body. Then we inherently accept that the human biology needs to coexist with Jesus' divine essence. We inherently accept that the biology does coexist with divinity within the comments given as well.
There is no need to debate it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Nice. Now lets see your BIBLICAL evidence that supports your statement.
Just read quote that was provided; it does not say sex. There are multiple locations in bible where sex is explicitly/directly described and indirectly described.
The given quote/passage does not provide any description. Ergo, no sex.
And Mary said she had "known" no man, which would imply she had never had sex with any man as was totally perplexed by the idea. Luke 1:34.Was she too raped by a son of god as in days of old?
Still never had sex. Rape is sex. Just a type of sex that is not good. As explained above, the words in the passages do not say sex nor imply sex. Nor do we read about rape. Ergo, not sex or rape.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Interesting.
What would you consider to be proof?
How does proof and evidence coincide if evidence is a part of the play?
What are your standards for evidence for any conversation?
What are your standards for the God conversation?
Created:
Posted in:
Hm . . .
His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit
This does not imply sex.
Sex is never mentioned nor implied.
Instead we understand God created a biological human to coexist with the Son.
Just as God created life from non life/nothing.
Created:
Posted in:
the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit" said Rabbi David Kimhi - " therefore, with reference to this god whom you call Father, Son and Holy Spirit, - that part which you call the Father must be prior to that which you call Son, for if they were always coexistent would have to be called twin brothers.More over, if the Son is the Father what of Mary getting pregnant? Is this not an incestuous congregation? The Father has sex with the mother to conceive the Son who is also the Father.....so technically the Son, who is also the father, had sex with his mother"...
There is common misunderstandings about the relationship between 3 persons within Trinity.
However greatest ignorance in this quote is that God did not have sex with Mary to have Mary concieve a physical child within her womb. That child being Jesus.
Such a concept is not in the bible. Nor in christian theology.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Hey Rough Rider.
There does not appear to be a concensus on what counts as evidence as well.
Some want to be like Thomas (touch the wounds) but others look at logic (reasoning existence).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
Have you heard about a claim that astrology can prove the "star" that the wisemen followed?
Im not to certain on it. Nor know importance. Just checking on your thoughts of it.
Created:
Posted in:
Is it ok if I said, just around the river bend? .......To make disney reference.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
I invite you to read a debate that I was in. The pro has made same claim that Israel has made all attempts for peace
Would like to know your thoughts on pro post.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Sorry I had to take time away.
So T.s. is saying, " the Bible makes it quite clear..."
You are saying that is wrong? The bible cant make something clear because it is ambiguise (it is not clear.)
I am understanding your correct?
So T.s. is saying, " the Bible makes it quite clear..."
You are saying that is wrong? The bible cant make something clear because it is ambiguise (it is not clear.)
I am understanding your correct?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Its a MIRACLE! . The Reverend Tradesecret actually finally agrees with I have been saying about the scriptures since the day I joined this forum and after years of him denying this fact and repeatedly telling me that the bible is;"Crystal clear. Unambiguous".
Are you saying that the bible is not crystal clear?
Please elaborate?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgim
I hear of holloween groups trying real zombie games. Where you sign a contract/waiver and then the workers chace you around. Would you take part in that?
Do you have a prefered zombie game?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I feel like vampires are the one up or 10 up on zombies. They are smart and hard to kill.
Can be easier to trap Zombies or lead them to their demise. Vampires lead you to your demise. Lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Discord seems to be the place everyone goes to for game day and preparation. Unless your aim is to stream?
Id really like to figure a way to dm a tabletop game based on star fox (nintendo).
Roll20 has a bunch of west marches groups. If you need to research or what ever Im sure you could use their format on how to operate and manage.
Created:
So can a person criticise IDF and Hamas, whilst seperating hamas fron palestine?
Created:
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
... Oh. You replied? This is my normal reaction to trolls.
:)
Created:
-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Oh hey you are not banned anymore. Good for you.
Created:
There was an online version available for free. They have many game options to play so its not just the curent version but speed play and older versions.
Created:
Posted in:
Anyone else play it or in to it?
I had bunches of fun. Highly recomended.
There are some playthroughs on twitch.
Maybe youtube.
Someone developed a way to play on computer with a.i. game master I think.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
What are you talking about?
All that other junk you are questioning or asking. Uh - doesnt apply to my post or this thread. N/a.
Why are you developing a relationship where there is none?
I'd like you to show me another way ....
This does not address what I said. Thanks?
I said the word you claim T.S did say is not in their text. The message you claim T.S. said is not in their text.
Ergo, misquote.
Why don't you simply show me how I have misquoted the idiot?
I just did chico. .
So when you say, " T.s. believes "x" and provide a quote that does not demonstrate that T.s. believes "x," then you misquoted.
You misquoted because you misrepresent what was actually said.
SHersh.
Created:
What are these quotes of and from?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Look.
Chico.
Its like this. You can read a childs book and a novel. One is more complex than the other.
Some people can understand both.
Some can read both but find disinterest in the novel. Some adults don't understand the novel.
Those links speak for themselvesThere are absolutely no misquotes in my post above.....
I put misrepresentation along with misquoting. Maybe you don't?
Oh well miscommunication happens.
I'll explain.
S/he believes it is "crystal clear".#55 without complexity or ambiguity in the slightest.
when T.S. argues against ambiguity in the bible, there can still be complexity to the bible. ambiguity is not synonymous to complexity. Complex text can be crystal clear, just like a novel.
We can copy/paste the text in any document app or online tool to search for words. T.s. does not use the words simple, simplicity, complex, or complexity in any way.
So when you say, " T.s. believes "x" and provide a quote that does not demonstrate that T.s. believes "x," then you misquoted.
That's simple. T.s. CAN believe that the bible is both with complexity and without ambiguity.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Lol.
As usual Stephen, you misquote everything you provide.
First, I said the bible is more complex than greek mythology.
The bible can very well be clear or understandible AND more complex than a comparible text.
So your " tradesecret" is not the person you think they are is pointless. You put together a long list of N/A (mis)quotes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
I always wondered what would happen if germany had gone deeper into africa. I know the land is not as developed, but I always figured africa would not have been conquered.
Either way Japan did same thing by attacking U.s. Spread themselves to thin. However, as mentioned above. If America still gets the nuke first, the end result may very well still be peace treaty and surrender by Japan. However, would that also mean Getmany would surrender without Allied troops invading Germany? That is a scary thought.
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
True. Even if someone is athiest, they should look into context and depth, not just simplicity. The bible is more dynamic and complex than greek mythology.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Well yes thats a given.
But Im just asking about the war.
Ex: would hitler still die the same way or germany still loss?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Maybe world war two would have been just a european war and war in asia if things moved slower?
Created:
Civil war and famine pleagued Somalia during early 1990's. As U.S. and U.N. forces get more and more involved with peacekeeping and providing foriegn aid to southern Somalia, President Clinton approves measures to obtain leading memebers of local malitia.
An operation is quickly approved to obtain said members. The events that occured is well documented in a non-fiction novel and then displayed in the movie "Black Hawk Down."
Known as the battle of Mogadishu, the battle is described in more detail here:
Would the battle have been more successful for the American troopers if they had acted in more methodical and slower pace?
Created:
Posted in:
Would history be different if Nazis expanded slower?
Ok. First, I am glad we are not in an alternative world where things suck.
Now. We know the path that nazi Germany did take. Allies won. Yay.
Would there be any difference if they had moved slower?
Ex:
- If they did not attack france when they did
- If they kept their alliance/ non attack pact with Russia
- If they had developed more alliances
- If their jump to war occured 3 years later
Would the war occured any different way other than win/loose?
Would the war actually occured?
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Phones monitor what we speak!
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
We should also remember that this single passage is not the be all end all. There are other passages that, when combined, develop the means to love others and ourselves.
So hard to find when we focus so much on single lines eh?
Created: