Originally posted by robbie carrobieNah.
You know who you remind me of Ghost of Puke? The judge at the end of Pink Floyds epic album, The Wall. He condemns 'the worm', on the basis of the incontrovertible evidence of showing feelings, feelings of an almost human nature and concludes, that 'this will not do'. Perhaps if you were not so self assuming and paraded around with a rainbow gloriou ...[text shortened]... ke a rocket and boost away from me to a galaxy far far far far away and try to find them? Adiós.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by Suzianneyes, it is okay for agerg or anybody to call your beliefs dogsh$t....i dont have a problem with it.
Oh, but it's okay when Agerg calls my beliefs dog$hit, isn't it?
Forget it, you haven't been listening to anything else I've been saying, so why start now?
im just holding you to the standards you are asking from other people. you stated that people should respect your beliefs and that its only okay, if you are calling somebody from the same religion (i think the term you used was 'faith brother' or something like that)....since that statement you have insulted dasa and fmf's beliefs.
how can you expect people to respect your beliefs, if you are not willing to respect theirs?
Originally posted by SuzianneIt is you who runs the risk of making yourself look foolish by evading the point blank question about your own verbatim quote: What "understanding of God" do you claim dogs have?
Despite all your caterwauling in this and other threads, I don't believe you're stupid. You quoted me to start off this thread, ostensibly to show me up as the stupid one. Nice try. Figure it out yourself from what I've said. My meaning is clear.
Originally posted by DasaHow do you know Suzianne is an animal killer?
Suzianna believes in a meat eating God.
When a person accepts God as a meat eater and animal killer ..............then it is a very very very sad day for spirituality and truth.
I don't kill animals; I just eat them. Does that count for something?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAll this talk about a god from humans. Right.
No its hogwash. Gods love is not unconditional. A fact often misunderstood by those with a purely emotional faith. He only holds out the prospect of everlasting life to those who put faith in his son, just by way of example. John 3:16. Clearly the condition is that you exercise faith in Jesus Christ.
The idea that Gods love is unconditional i ...[text shortened]... would be interested in discussing how or why it has come about either scripturally or otherwise.
Originally posted by RJHindsBelief systems allow persons to blindly accept false doctrine.
Dasa says TRUE RELIGION has nothing to do with belief systems, yet he believes in the vedic literature and ask others to believe in it too as a source of TRUE RELIGION.
Such as (systemic animal cruelty) and (6000 year old earth) and (rotting dead bodies coming back to life) and many other falsities. etc.....
The Vedas and true religion have no such falsities.
1 edit
Originally posted by DasaYou're almost as boring as the rabid anti-gay crowd. Or the pro-lifers. Or the YECs. Or sonhouse.
Suzianna believes in a meat eating God.
When a person accepts God as a meat eater and animal killer ..............then it is a very very very sad day for spirituality and truth.
One track ponies, all of you.
Originally posted by FMFNo, sorry. I'm not playing your game. Figure it out yourself, that is, IF you have the ability. If you don't, too bad. You wouldn't get it even if I told you, you're not equipped. Most others here grok *exactly* what I mean. They may not agree, but at least they understand English enough to know what I'm saying. They've pieced it together. It goes back to the original context, which you've lost in your overarching need to beat me over the head with your obnoxious, needful personality. Sorry, feeding time's over.
It is you who runs the risk of making yourself look foolish by evading the point blank question about your own verbatim quote: What "understanding of God" do you claim dogs have?
Originally posted by stellspalfieWow, way to twist what I actually said into what you think I said, all so you can deride it. Well, enjoy. I even explained why you're not getting it, and still you persist with what you *think* I said.
yes, it is okay for agerg or anybody to call your beliefs dogsh$t....i dont have a problem with it.
im just holding you to the standards you are asking from other people. you stated that people should respect your beliefs and that its only okay, if you are calling somebody from the same religion (i think the term you used was 'faith brother' or someth ...[text shortened]...
how can you expect people to respect your beliefs, if you are not willing to respect theirs?
Originally posted by robbie carrobie"When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things." -- 1 Corinthians 13:11
You know who you remind me of Ghost of Puke? The judge at the end of Pink Floyds epic album, The Wall. He condemns 'the worm', on the basis of the incontrovertible evidence of showing feelings, feelings of an almost human nature and concludes, that 'this will not do'. Perhaps if you were not so self assuming and paraded around with a rainbow gloriou ...[text shortened]... ke a rocket and boost away from me to a galaxy far far far far away and try to find them? Adiós.
But then again, you don't even properly understand a simple text like Colossians, why should I expect you to understand Corinthians?
Seriously, grow up.
Originally posted by SuzianneNo, sorry. I'm not playing your game. Figure it out yourself, that is, IF you have the ability. If you don't, too bad. You wouldn't get it even if I told you, you're not equipped. Most others here grok *exactly* what I mean. They may not agree, but at least they understand English enough to know what I'm saying. They've pieced it together. It goes back to the original context, which you've lost in your overarching need to beat me over the head with your obnoxious, needful personality. Sorry, feeding time's over.
Here is the original context. It was on the 'Who is the bigger blasphemer?' thread: You said ~ "Dogs understand having an unconditional love, and therefore, in some respects I can see dogs having a better understanding of God than some people do." It is not clear from this what "understanding of God" you are claiming that dogs have. Care to explain?