1 edit
Originally posted by avalanchethecatits different in a way, the mandates of the Mosaic Law are somewhat cold and specific, legalistic, the exercise of conscience is much closer to what God intended and therefore reflects a greater degree of humanness. Expressions like treat a slave as a beloved brother, kindly etc are echoed in the law in a less perfect and more cumbersome way.
Again:
So you accept that the moral guidance given in the 'divinely inspired' OT is different from that given in the 'divinely inspired' NT?
Originally posted by FMFThat depends, do I have to pay for their health care? 😛
On page 14 of this Thread 150734, robbie stated that his version of God permits him to own slaves [as long as it does not break local secular law].
[b]FMF: What about twenty first century Christians? Are they permitted by God to own slaves?
robbie: If its not against the law, yes.
It came at the end of a lengthy dialogue.
Is this o ...[text shortened]... ion about the legitimacy of slavery even until this day a commonly held belief among Christians?[/b]
Originally posted by whodeySome serious input from you, speaking as a Christian on this issue, would be more interesting. Philemon 10-17 and 1 Peter 2:18-20 have been cited as proof that Christians have a God given right to own slaves. Do you share this view?
That depends, do I have to pay for their health care? 😛
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhere can we see the Law that replaced Mosaic Law in the matter of owning slaves and its moral basis? Is it in the NT somewhere?
its different in a way, the mandates of the Mosaic Law are somewhat cold and specific, legalistic, the exercise of conscience is much closer to what God intended and therefore reflects a greater degree of humanness. Expressions like treat a slave as a beloved brother, kindly etc are echoed in the law in a less perfect and more cumbersome way.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRC has clearly accused me of lying and refuses to show how it is a lie.
I have produced your lie, no more attention for you.
RC can't seem to help but show his "fruit". One would think that a fellow JW would correct his continued and ongoing use of deceit. So far as I know, that has yet to have happened on this forum.
[/b]
Luke 6
43“For there is no good tree which produces bad fruit, nor, on the other hand, a bad tree which produces good fruit. 44“For each tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they pick grapes from a briar bush. 45“The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe issue is whether you are correct in your claim that God has given Christians the right to own slaves.
Are there any countries where slavery is legal? if not it makes FMFs question of a 21st century Christian owning slaves quite ridiculous.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne[/b][/b]surely the level of attention you get should be enough to boost your self esteem to manageable levels, there there its alrlight, you'll do.
RC has clearly accused me of lying and refuses to show how it is a lie.
RC can't seem to help but show his "fruit". One would think that a fellow JW would correct his continued and ongoing use of deceit. So far as I know, that has yet to have happened on this forum..
Luke 6
43“For there is no good tree which produces bad fruit, nor, on th ...[text shortened]... forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart
Originally posted by robbie carrobieDo you consider yourself a model Jehovah's Witness? Is the behavior that you've displayed thread after thread indicative of the "fruit" that one can expect from a Jehovah's Witness?
surely the level of attention you get should be enough to boost your self esteem to manageable levels, there there its alrlight, you'll do.
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI consider myself to be a repentant sinner. what about you, have you no need of repentance?
Do you consider yourself a model Jehovah's Witness? Is the behavior that you've displayed thread after thread indicative of the "fruit" that one can expect from a Jehovah's Witness?
O ye wha are sae guid yoursel',
Sae pious and sae holy,
Ye've nought to do but mark and tell
Your neibours' fauts and folly!
Whase life is like a weel-gaun mill,
Supplied wi' store o' water;
The heaped happer's ebbing still,
An' still the clap plays clatter.
Robert Burns,
if you need a translation, let me know.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSee you Rabbie,
I consider myself to be a repentant sinner. what about you, have you no need of repentance?
O ye wha are sae guid yoursel',
Sae pious and sae holy,
Ye've nought to do but mark and tell
Your neibours' fauts and folly!
Whase life is like a weel-gaun mill,
Supplied wi' store o' water;
The heaped happer's ebbing still,
An' still the clap plays clatter.
Robert Burns,
if you need a translation, let me know.
There's nay need for you
tae talk tae me lai tha'
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf you are in fact "repentant", then how do you explain your continued and ongoing use of deceit?
I consider myself to be a repentant sinner. what about you, have you no need of repentance?
O ye wha are sae guid yoursel',
Sae pious and sae holy,
Ye've nought to do but mark and tell
Your neibours' fauts and folly!
Whase life is like a weel-gaun mill,
Supplied wi' store o' water;
The heaped happer's ebbing still,
An' still the clap plays clatter.
Robert Burns,
if you need a translation, let me know.
Originally posted by FMFRight, but what you fail to include in your definition of discussion or debate is all the other things you do which make me not want to discuss anything with you. That is the disrespect I was referring to. Still clueless about why I mentioned the "meta-game"? Probably not. You just choose not to respond to it. Probably a good idea.
Pressing robbie to give his explanation of the moral basis for the institution of slavery that he claims there is. Or where the Biblical law governing slavery is laid out. This is not "disrespect". It's a discussion. It's a debate.
You do know what I'm talking about despite your feigned innocence. I shouldn't have responded to this last post, since it's more of the same, designed to get me to respond. So no, I'm done with your bullying manner. Paint that in whatever light you want. I don't care. Knock yourself out.